Hi,
On 09. 03. 19 17:19, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Related to this, I have a query on how the DT node for gmii2rgmii should
>> look.
>> One of the users of gmii2rgmii is Cadence macb driver. In Xilinx tree, we use
>> this piece of code to register this mdiobus:
>> + mdio_np =
> Related to this, I have a query on how the DT node for gmii2rgmii should look.
> One of the users of gmii2rgmii is Cadence macb driver. In Xilinx tree, we use
> this piece of code to register this mdiobus:
> + mdio_np = of_get_child_by_name(np, "mdio");
> + if (mdio_np) {
> +
Hi Andrew,
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 1:03 PM Harini Katakam wrote:
>
> Hi,
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:35 PM Harini Katakam wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andrew, Paul,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:15 PM Michal Simek
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 21. 02. 19 12:03, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > On 21. 02. 19
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:35 PM Harini Katakam wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew, Paul,
>
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:15 PM Michal Simek wrote:
> >
> > On 21. 02. 19 12:03, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > On 21. 02. 19 11:24, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:58 +0100,
Hi Andrew, Paul,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 2:15 PM Michal Simek wrote:
>
> On 21. 02. 19 12:03, Michal Simek wrote:
> > On 21. 02. 19 11:24, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:58 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 19. 02. 19 18:25, Andrew Lunn
On 21. 02. 19 12:03, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 21. 02. 19 11:24, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:58 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 19. 02. 19 18:25, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion! So I had a closer look at that driver to try
>
On 21. 02. 19 11:24, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:58 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 19. 02. 19 18:25, Andrew Lunn wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion! So I had a closer look at that driver to try
and see what could go wrong and it looks like I
Hi,
On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 07:58 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 19. 02. 19 18:25, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > Thanks for the suggestion! So I had a closer look at that driver to try
> > > and see what could go wrong and it looks like I found a few things
> > > there.
> >
> > Hi Paul
> >
>
Hi,
On 19. 02. 19 18:25, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Thanks for the suggestion! So I had a closer look at that driver to try
>> and see what could go wrong and it looks like I found a few things
>> there.
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Yes, this driver has issues. If i remember correctly, it got merged
> while i
> Thanks for the suggestion! So I had a closer look at that driver to try
> and see what could go wrong and it looks like I found a few things
> there.
Hi Paul
Yes, this driver has issues. If i remember correctly, it got merged
while i was on vacation. I pointed out a few issues, but the authors
Hi,
On Fri, 2019-02-15 at 10:53 -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 2/15/19 10:34 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > As I was mentionning to Andrew in the initial submission of this patch,
> > this driver is a bit unusual since it represents a GMII to RGMII
> > bridge, so it's not actually a PHY
On 2/15/19 10:34 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2019-02-15 at 09:38 -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 2/15/19 8:32 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
>>> Some PHY drivers like the generic one do not provide a read_status
>>> callback on their own but rely on genphy_read_status being
Hi,
On Fri, 2019-02-15 at 09:38 -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 2/15/19 8:32 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> > Some PHY drivers like the generic one do not provide a read_status
> > callback on their own but rely on genphy_read_status being called
> > directly.
> >
> > With the current code,
On 2/15/19 8:32 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Some PHY drivers like the generic one do not provide a read_status
> callback on their own but rely on genphy_read_status being called
> directly.
>
> With the current code, this results in a NULL function pointer call.
> Call genphy_read_status
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 05:32:20PM +0100, Paul Kocialkowski wrote:
> Some PHY drivers like the generic one do not provide a read_status
> callback on their own but rely on genphy_read_status being called
> directly.
>
> With the current code, this results in a NULL function pointer call.
> Call
Some PHY drivers like the generic one do not provide a read_status
callback on their own but rely on genphy_read_status being called
directly.
With the current code, this results in a NULL function pointer call.
Call genphy_read_status instead when there is no specific callback.
Fixes:
16 matches
Mail list logo
