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;
Message-ID: <8a832e3d2eb2e3fc14ade43c4feb1cbafc37c5d7.camel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: phy: mscc: fix packet loss due to RGMII delays
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@amd.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2023 14:47:22 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20230627121352.tsqycdvzyqqpdejb@skbuf>
References: <20230627091109.3374701-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
         <20230627121352.tsqycdvzyqqpdejb@skbuf>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4 (3.46.4-1.fc37) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2023-06-27 at 15:13 +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 12:11:09PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Two deadly typos break RX and TX traffic on the VSC8502 PHY using RGMII
> > if phy-mode =3D "rgmii-id" or "rgmii-txid", and no "tx-internal-delay-p=
s"
> > override exists. The negative error code from phy_get_internal_delay()
> > does not get overridden with the delay deduced from the phy-mode, and
> > later gets committed to hardware. Also, the rx_delay gets overridden by
> > what should have been the tx_delay.
> >=20
> > Fixes: dbb050d2bfc8 ("phy: mscc: Add support for RGMII delay configurat=
ion")
> > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
> > ---
>=20
> I may have mis-targeted this patch towards "net" while the "net-next"
> pull request has not been yet sent out. Can patchwork be instructed to
> re-run the tests on net-next?

I'm not 110% sure, but I think you have to re-send the patch with a
different prefix to achieve the above.

Cheers,

Paolo
>=20