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:   Tue, 23 May 2023 14:23:58 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com
Cc:     hkallweit1@gmail.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, davem@davemloft.net,
        edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        ramon.nordin.rodriguez@ferroamp.se, Horatiu.Vultur@microchip.com,
        Woojung.Huh@microchip.com, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com,
        Thorsten.Kummermehr@microchip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] net: phy: microchip_t1s: fix reset
 complete status handling
Message-ID: <e9db9ce6-dee8-4a78-bfa4-aace4ae88257@lunn.ch>
References: <20230522113331.36872-1-Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com>
 <20230522113331.36872-5-Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com>
 <f0769755-6d04-4bf5-a273-c19b1b76f7f6@lunn.ch>
 <b226c865-d4a7-c126-9e54-60498232b5a5@microchip.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <b226c865-d4a7-c126-9e54-60498232b5a5@microchip.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 05:30:06AM +0000, Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On 22/05/23 6:13 pm, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> > 
> > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 05:03:29PM +0530, Parthiban Veerasooran wrote:
> >> As per the datasheet DS-LAN8670-1-2-60001573C.pdf, the Reset Complete
> >> status bit in the STS2 register to be checked before proceeding for the
> >> initial configuration.
> > 
> > Is this the unmaskable interrupt status bit which needs clearing?
> Yes, it is non-maskable interrupt.
> > There is no mention of interrupts here.
> The device will assert the Reset Complete (RESETC) bit in the Status 2 
> (STS2) register to indicate that it has completed its internal 
> initialization and is ready for configuration. As the Reset Complete 
> status is non-maskable, the IRQ_N pin will always be asserted and driven 
> low following a device reset. Upon reading of the Status 2 register, the 
> pending Reset Complete status bit will be automatically cleared causing 
> the IRQ_N pin to be released and pulled high again.
> 
> Do you think it makes sense to add these explanation regarding the reset 
> and interrupt behavior with the above comment for a better understanding?

Comments should explain 'Why?'. At the moment, it is not clear why you
are reading the status. The discussion so far has been about clearing
the interrupt, not about checking it has actually finished its
internal reset. So i think you should be mentioning interrupts
somewhere. Especially since this is a rather odd behaviour.

	   Andrew