Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2023 10:06:27 +0200
From:   Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc:     davem@davemloft.net,
        Sit Michael Wei Hong <michael.wei.hong.sit@intel.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
        "linux-stm32 @ st-md-mailman . stormreply . com" 
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "alexis . lothore @ bootlin . com" <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: phylink: check for SFP bus presence in
 phylink_expects_phy
Message-ID: <20230412100627.1daab691@pc-288.home>
In-Reply-To: <ZDZi+fs13A8JJFOs@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
References: <20230412074850.41260-1-maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>
        <ZDZi+fs13A8JJFOs@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Organization: Bootlin
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello Russell,

On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 08:51:21 +0100
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 09:48:50AM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> > When an SFP bus is present, we don't expect a PHY to be attached
> > directly from the MAC driver, it will be handled by phylink at SFP
> > attach time.  
> 
> If we have a SFP, then phylink should be configured for in-band mode.
> Maybe fix the firmware description instead?
> 

The DT used on that platform has the following configuration :

[...]
&gmac1 {
  status = "okay";
  phy-mode = "sgmii";
  managed = "in-band-status";
  sfp = <&sfp>;
[...]
}

Here phylink_expects_phy() returns true because although we use
in-band management, the link mode is set to sgmii, and
phylink_expects_phy() checks if we are in in-band mode AND 802.3z.

As we have an SFP and the link mode will be changed according to the
module we plug-in, there should be no problem switching phy-mode to
"1000BaseX", so I'm perfectly fine with this solution.

However, is it semantically correct to use sgmii here ? If so, it may be
a bit counter-intuitive to have to set the mode to 1000BaseX just so
that the phylink_expects_phy() check passes ?

Thanks for the quick reply,

Maxime