Date:   Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:49:55 +0100
From:   Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc:     Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Wei Fang <wei.fang@nxp.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>, kernel@pengutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Arun.Ramadoss@microchip.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 02/23] net: phy: add
 genphy_c45_read_eee_abilities() function
Message-ID: <20230206104955.GE12366@pengutronix.de>
References: <20230201145845.2312060-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
 <20230201145845.2312060-3-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
 <20230204005418.7ryb4ihuzxlbs2nl@skbuf>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230204005418.7ryb4ihuzxlbs2nl@skbuf>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

Hi Vladimir,

On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 02:54:18AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 03:58:24PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:

[....]

> > +static const int phy_eee_100_10000_features_array[6] = {
> 
> Don't need array length unless the array is sparse, which isn't the case here.
> 
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_100baseT_Full_BIT,
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseT_Full_BIT,
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_10000baseT_Full_BIT,
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_1000baseKX_Full_BIT,
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_10000baseKX4_Full_BIT,
> > +	ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_10000baseKR_Full_BIT,
> 
> Why stop at 10GBase-KR? Register 3.20 defines EEE abilities up to 100G
> (for speeds >10G, there seem to be 2 modes, "deep sleep" or "fast wake",
> with "deep sleep" being essentially equivalent to the only mode
> available for <=10G modes).

Hm,

If i take only deep sleep, missing modes are:
3.20.13 100GBASE-R deep sleep
       family of Physical Layer devices using 100GBASE-R encoding:
       100000baseCR4_Full
       100000baseKR4_Full
       100000baseCR10_Full (missing)
       100000baseSR4_Full
       100000baseSR10_Full (missing)
       100000baseLR4_ER4_Full

3.20.11 25GBASE-R deep sleep
       family of Physical Layer devices using 25GBASE-R encoding:
       25000baseCR_Full
       25000baseER_Full (missing)
       25000baseKR_Full
       25000baseLR_Full (missing)
       25000baseSR_Full

3.20.9 40GBASE-R deep sleep
       family of Physical Layer devices using 40GBASE-R encoding:
       40000baseKR4_Full
       40000baseCR4_Full
       40000baseSR4_Full
       40000baseLR4_Full

3.20.7 40GBASE-T
       40000baseT_Full (missing)

I have no experience with modes > 1Gbit. Do all of them correct? What
should we do with missing modes? Or may be it make sense to implement >
10G modes separately?

Regards,
Oleksij
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |