On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:48:47AM -0400, Brad wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 08:32:40AM -0400, Brad wrote:
> > Replaces the magic numbers with the standard define from mii.h and
> > only advertises the flow control capabilities via the ANAR register
> > if the MIIF_DOPAUSE flag is set, as done by all other PHY.
> > 
> > No matter what I can't seem to get jmphy(4) to autoneg flow control
> > status whether the code as is or with the proper define's, with or
> > without the MIIF_DOPAUSE checking as would be expected. So I figure
> > might as well tidy up the code for consistency and readability.
> 
> *sigh* need sleep. I thought I had already merged in the jmphy_status()
> bit and double checking shows I had not. Now it works. :)

I also had a user test this a few months ago now that jme(4) is starting
to show up in real hw.

OK?


> Index: jmphy.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/mii/jmphy.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.2
> diff -u -p -r1.2 jmphy.c
> --- jmphy.c   20 Oct 2008 00:05:38 -0000      1.2
> +++ jmphy.c   25 Jul 2009 12:44:30 -0000
> @@ -254,12 +254,10 @@ jmphy_status(struct mii_softc *sc)
>       }
>  
>       if ((ssr & JMPHY_SSR_DUPLEX) != 0)
> -             mii->mii_media_active |= IFM_FDX;
> +             mii->mii_media_active |= mii_phy_flowstatus(sc) | IFM_FDX;
>       else
>               mii->mii_media_active |= IFM_HDX;
>  
> -     /* XXX Flow-control. */
> -
>       if (IFM_SUBTYPE(mii->mii_media_active) == IFM_1000_T) {
>               if ((PHY_READ(sc, MII_100T2SR) & GTSR_MS_RES) != 0)
>                       mii->mii_media_active |= IFM_ETH_MASTER;
> @@ -336,8 +334,9 @@ jmphy_auto(struct mii_softc *sc, struct 
>               bmcr |= BMCR_LOOP;
>  
>       anar = jmphy_anar(ife);
> -     /* XXX Always advertise pause capability. */
> -     anar |= (3 << 10);
> +
> +     if (sc->mii_flags & MIIF_DOPAUSE)
> +             anar |= ANAR_FC | ANAR_PAUSE_TOWARDS;
>  
>       if ((sc->mii_flags & MIIF_HAVE_GTCR) != 0) {
>  #ifdef notyet
> 
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Reply via email to