On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 08:43:12PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote: > On Thu, 28 May 2020 15:48:05 +0100 > Russell King - ARM Linux admin <li...@armlinux.org.uk> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 04:33:35PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote: > > > below is the dts part for the two network interfaces. The switch to > > > the outside has two ports, which correlate to the two internal ports. > > > And the switch propagates the link state of the external ports to > > > the internal ports. > > > > Okay, so this DTS hasn't been reviewed... > > that's from our partner, I'm just using it. Stripping it down isn't > the point for my now. > > > This isn't correct - you are requesting that in-band status is used > > (i.o.w. the in-band control word, see commit 4cba5c210365), but your > > bug report wants to enable AN bypass because there is no in-band > > control word. This seems to be rather contradictory. > > > > May I suggest you use a fixed-link here, which will not have any > > afaik fixed-link will always be up, and we want to have the link state > from the switch external ports. > > > inband status, as there is no in-band control word being sent by > > the switch? That is also the conventional way of handling switch > > links. > > again, we want to propagte the external link state inside to all > the internal nodes. So this will not work anymore with fixed-link.
Can you explain this please? Just as we think we understand what's going on here, you throw in a new comment that makes us confused. You said previously that the mvpp2 was connected to a switch, which makes us think that you've got some DSA-like setup going on here. Does your switch drop its serdes link when all the external links (presumably the 10G SFP+ cages) fail? Both Andrew and myself wish to have a complete picture before we move forward with this. Thanks. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 424kbps up
