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:   Fri, 19 May 2023 23:34:49 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@microchip.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@corigine.com>,
        "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, kernel@pengutronix.de,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/2] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: Make flow
 control, speed, and duplex on CPU port configurable
Message-ID: <20230519203449.pc5vbfgbfc6rdo6i@skbuf>
References: <20230519124700.635041-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
 <20230519124700.635041-2-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
 <20230519143004.luvz73jiyvnqxk4y@skbuf>
 <20230519185015.GA18246@pengutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230519185015.GA18246@pengutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 08:50:15PM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> Thank you for your feedback. I see your point. 
> 
> We need to remember that the KSZ switch series has different types of
> ports. Specifically, for the KSZ8 series, there's a unique port. This
> port is unique because it's the only one that can be configured with
> global registers, and it is only one supports tail tagging. This special
> port is already referenced in the driver by "dev->cpu_port", so I continued
> using it in my patch.

Ok, I understand, so for the KSZ8 family, the assumption about which
port will use tail tagging is baked into the hardware.

> It is important to note that while this port has an xMII interface, it
> is not the only port that could have an xMII interface. Therefore, using
> "dev->info->internal_phy" may not be the best way to identify this port,
> because there can be ports that are not global/cpu, have an xMII
> interface, but don't have an internal PHY.

Right, but since we're talking about phylink, the goal is to identify
the xMII ports, not the CPU ports... This is a particularly denatured
case because the xMII port is global and is also the CPU port.