Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: phy: marvell10g: Utilize
 gen10g_soft_reset()
To:     Moritz Fischer <moritz.fischer@ettus.com>,
        Russell King <rmk@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20180228193612.29409-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com>
 <20180228193612.29409-6-f.fainelli@gmail.com>
 <20180228194449.GB30733@flint.armlinux.org.uk>
 <CAAtXAHcdU-MuXk6qD+mM=WhCcHF8J2tQOwT-BFdyOLbdqNPfYQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42e88f0b-61c4-7e59-a6e6-1f8b8677a480@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Feb 2018 14:07:55 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAtXAHcdU-MuXk6qD+mM=WhCcHF8J2tQOwT-BFdyOLbdqNPfYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 02/28/2018 11:49 AM, Moritz Fischer wrote:
> Florian,
> 
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Russell King <rmk@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:36:12AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> We do the same thing as the generic function: nothing, so utilize it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/phy/marvell10g.c | 7 +------
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/marvell10g.c b/drivers/net/phy/marvell10g.c
>>> index 8a0bd98fdec7..da014eae1476 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/marvell10g.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/marvell10g.c
>>> @@ -75,11 +75,6 @@ static int mv3310_probe(struct phy_device *phydev)
>>>   * Resetting the MV88X3310 causes it to become non-responsive.  Avoid
>>>   * setting the reset bit(s).
>>>   */
>>> -static int mv3310_soft_reset(struct phy_device *phydev)
>>> -{
>>> -     return 0;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>
>> You do realise that getting rid of that function makes a nonsense of the
>> comment above it - and removing the comment along with the function gets
>> rid of the very important reason _why_ we have en empty reset method?
>>
>>>  static int mv3310_config_init(struct phy_device *phydev)
>>>  {
>>>       __ETHTOOL_DECLARE_LINK_MODE_MASK(supported) = { 0, };
>>> @@ -377,7 +372,7 @@ static struct phy_driver mv3310_drivers[] = {
>>>                                 SUPPORTED_10000baseT_Full |
>>>                                 SUPPORTED_Backplane,
>>>               .probe          = mv3310_probe,
>>> -             .soft_reset     = mv3310_soft_reset,
>>> +             .soft_reset     = gen10g_soft_reset,
>>>               .config_init    = mv3310_config_init,
>>>               .config_aneg    = mv3310_config_aneg,
>>>               .aneg_done      = mv3310_aneg_done,
>>> --
>>> 2.14.1
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Russell King
>> ARM architecture Linux Kernel maintainer
> 
> FWIW I have a local patch that goes something like that, which I meant to send
> at one point and forgot
> 
> Something like that:
> 
>  static int gen10g_soft_reset(struct phy_device *phydev)
>  {
> +       int val;
> +
> +       val = phy_read_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_PCS, MDIO_CTRL1);
> +       if (val < 0)
> +               return val;
> +
> +       val |= MDIO_CTRL1_RESET;
> +       phy_write_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_PMAPMD, MDIO_CTRL1, val);
> +
>  -       /* Do nothing for now */
>         return 0;
>  }
> 
> If that looks reasonable I can properly submit a patch,

Sure, I would have to check the specification document to make sure
whether this does not need to be coded similarly to what
genphy_soft_reset() does, which is polling for the reset bit to clear
itself.

v2 also renamed the current gen10g_soft_reset() into
gen10g_no_soft_reset() so your implementation makes even more sense now.
-- 
Florian