Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Message-ID: <1bd2f3a9-3dd1-4c95-b4e5-c9bf2274f271@quicinc.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:47:04 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] net: phy: at803x: add QCA8084 ethernet phy support
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
CC:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
        <edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>, <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        <conor+dt@kernel.org>, <hkallweit1@gmail.com>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20231118062754.2453-1-quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
 <20231118062754.2453-4-quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
 <1eb60a08-f095-421a-bec6-96f39db31c09@lunn.ch>
 <ZVkRkhMHWcAR37fW@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <eee39816-b0b8-475c-aa4a-8500ba488a29@lunn.ch>
 <fef2ab86-ccd7-4693-8a7e-2dac2c80fd53@quicinc.com>
 <1d4d7761-6b42-48ec-af40-747cb4b84ca5@lunn.ch>
 <316fb626-4dc3-4540-9cc4-e45840e36f77@quicinc.com>
 <ZVyZ+8Q2eNfAKjO/@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <d2ac542c-aae3-49ae-ae2b-9defc4ca98eb@quicinc.com>
 <ZV8+/4eNzLpLzSDG@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZV8+/4eNzLpLzSDG@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 11/23/2023 8:01 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 06:57:59PM +0800, Jie Luo wrote:
>> On 11/21/2023 7:52 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
>>> Ultimately, you will need a way to use inband signalling with Cisco
>>> SGMII for 10M/100M/1G speeds, and then switch to 2500base-X when
>>> operating at 2.5G speeds, and that is done via the PHY driver
>>> updating phydev->interface.
>>>
>>> What we do need is some way for the PHY to also tell the PCS/MAC
>>> whether inband should be used. This is something I keep bringing up
>>> and now that we have PCS drivers revised to use the value from
>>> phylink_pcs_neg_mode() _and_ a consistent implementation amongst them
>>> we can now think about signalling to PCS drivers whether inband mode
>>> needs to be turned off when switching between modes.
>>
>> Yes, we can switch the interface mode according to the current link
>> speed in the pcs driver.
>> but the issue is that the phy-mode i specified for the PHYLINK,
>> if phy-mode is sgmii, the support capability is limited to maximum
>> capability 1G during the PHYLINK setup and i can't configure it to 2.5G
>> dynamically, if the phy-mode is 2500base-x, then PHY capability will
>> be modified to only support 2.5G, other speeds can't be linked up.
> 
> So you need my patches that add "possible_interfaces" to phylib so you
> can tell phylink that you will be switching between SGMII and
> 2500base-X. Please see the RFC posting of those patches I sent
> yesterday and try them out - you will need to modify your phylib
> driver to fill in phydev->possible_interfaces.

Your patches work on my board, thanks Russell.

> 
>>> There have been patches in the past that allow inband mode to be
>>> queried from phylib, and this is another important component in
>>> properly dealing with PHYs that need to use inband signalling with
>>> Cisco SGMII, but do not support inband signalling when operating at
>>> 2.5G speeds. The problem when operating at 2.5G speed is that the
>>> base-X protocols are normally for use over fibre, which is the media,
>>> and therefore the ethtool Autoneg bit should define whether inband
>>> gets used or not. However, in the case of a PHY using 2500base-X,
>>> the Autoneg bit continues to define whether autonegotiation should
>>> be used on the media, and in this case it's the media side of the
>>> PHY rather than the 2500base-X link.
>>>
>>> So, when using a 2500base-X link to a PHY, we need to disregard the
>>> Autoneg bit, but that then raises the question about how we should
>>> configure it - and one solution to that would be to entire of phylib
>>> what the PHY wants to do. Another is to somehow ask the PCS driver
>>> whether it supports inband signalling at 2500base-X, and resolve
>>> those capabilities.
>>
>> For the qca808x PHY, when it is linked in 2.5G, the autoneg is also
>> disabled in PCS hardware, so the sgmii+ of qca808x PHY is almost
>> same as 2500base-X.
> 
> Not "almost". It _is_ the same. This is the point I've been trying
> to get across to you. Without inband signalling, 1000base-X and SGMII
> (when operating at 1G) are _identical_ and entirely compatible.
> 
> You've said that your 2.5G "SGMII" mode has inband signalling disabled,
> and thus it without inband signalling, 2500base-X and this 2.5G mode
> are again identical and entirely compatible. There's no "almost" about
> it.
> 
> 
Yes, confirmed with HW guy, they work on the same way.