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;
Date:   Fri, 4 May 2018 19:17:06 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc:     Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@bootlin.com>, davem@davemloft.net,
        kishon@ti.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, gregory.clement@bootlin.com,
        jason@lakedaemon.net, sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com, maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com,
        miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, nadavh@marvell.com, stefanc@marvell.com,
        ymarkman@marvell.com, mw@semihalf.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 02/13] net: phy: sfp: handle non-wired SFP
 connectors
Message-ID: <20180504171706.GB17233@lunn.ch>
References: <20180504135643.23466-1-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com>
 <20180504135643.23466-3-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com>
 <e338472c-1f26-e49b-9a2d-7942e6ed4288@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e338472c-1f26-e49b-9a2d-7942e6ed4288@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 10:04:48AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 05/04/2018 06:56 AM, Antoine Tenart wrote:
> > SFP connectors can be solder on a board without having any of their pins
> > (LOS, i2c...) wired. In such cases the SFP link state cannot be guessed,
> > and the overall link status reporting is left to other layers.
> > 
> > In order to achieve this, a new SFP_DEV status is added, named UNKNOWN.
> > This mode is set when it is not possible for the SFP code to get the
> > link status and as a result the link status is reported to be always UP
> > from the SFP point of view.
> 
> Why represent the SFP in Device Tree then? Why not just declare this is
> a fixed link which would avoid having to introduce this "unknown" state.

Hi Antoine

I agree with Florian here.

It LOS was missing, but i2c worked, i could see some value in using
SFP, or order to be able to read the EEPROM. But if everything is
missing, fixed-link seems a better fit.

	 Andrew