Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:11:04 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
        David Jander <david@protonic.nl>, kernel@pengutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, mkl@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ethtool: provide UAPI for PHY master/slave
 configuration.
Message-ID: <20200415131104.GA657811@lunn.ch>
References: <20200415121209.12197-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200415121209.12197-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 02:12:09PM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> This UAPI is needed for BroadR-Reach 100BASE-T1 devices. Due to lack of
> auto-negotiation support, we needed to be able to configure the
> MASTER-SLAVE role of the port manually or from an application in user
> space.

Hi Oleksij

This is a nice way to do this.

> +/* Port mode */
> +#define PORT_MODE_MASTER	0x00
> +#define PORT_MODE_SLAVE		0x01
> +#define PORT_MODE_MASTER_FORCE	0x02
> +#define PORT_MODE_SLAVE_FORCE	0x03
> +#define PORT_MODE_UNKNOWN	0xff

It is not clear to me what PORT_MODE_MASTER and PORT_MODE_SLAVE. Do
these mean to negotiate master/slave? Maybe some comments, or clearer
names?

	Andrew