Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-66857-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:04:01 +0100
From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To: =?utf-8?B?S8O2cnk=?= Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
	Russ Weight <russ.weight@linux.dev>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	Dent Project <dentproject@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 14/17] dt-bindings: net: pse-pd: Add bindings
 for PD692x0 PSE controller
Message-ID: <Zc39sUlxnkrkXWhR@pengutronix.de>
References: <20240208-feature_poe-v3-0-531d2674469e@bootlin.com>
 <20240208-feature_poe-v3-14-531d2674469e@bootlin.com>
 <20240209145727.GA3702230-robh@kernel.org>
 <ZciUQqjM4Z8Tc6Db@pengutronix.de>
 <618be4b1-c52c-4b8f-8818-1e4150867cad@lunn.ch>
 <Zc3IrO_MXIdLXnEL@pengutronix.de>
 <20240215114123.128e7907@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20240215114123.128e7907@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 11:41:23AM +0100, Köry Maincent wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 09:17:48 +0100
> Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 06:41:54PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > Alternative A and B Overview
> > > > ----------------------------
> > > > 
> > > > - **Alternative A:** Utilizes the data-carrying pairs for power
> > > > transmission in 10/100BaseT networks. The power delivery's polarity in
> > > > this alternative can vary based on the MDI (Medium Dependent Interface)
> > > > or MDI-X (Medium Dependent Interface Crossover) configuration.
> > > > 
> > > > - **Alternative B:** Delivers power over the spare pairs not used for
> > > > data in 10/100BaseT networks. Unlike Alternative A, Alternative B's
> > > > method separates power from data lines within the cable. Though it is
> > > > less influenced by data transmission direction, Alternative B includes
> > > > two configurations with different polarities, known as variant X and
> > > > variant S, to accommodate different network requirements and device
> > > > specifications.  
> > > 
> > > Thanks for this documentation.
> > > 
> > > It might be worth pointing out that RJ-45 supports up to 4
> > > pairs. However, 10/100BaseT only makes use of two pairs for data
> > > transfer from the four. 1000BaseT and above make use of all four pairs
> > > for data transfer. If you don't know this, it is not so obvious what
> > > 'data-carrying pairs' and 'spare pairs' mean.  
> > 
> > @Kory, can you please update it.
> > 
> > > And what happens for 1000BaseT when all four pairs are in use?  
> > 
> > Hm.. good question. I didn't found the answer in the spec. By combining all
                                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > puzzle parts I assume, different Alternative configurations are designed
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > to handle conflict between "PSE Physical Layer classification" and PHY
> > autoneg.
> 
> Oleksij how did you get the definition of Alternative A uses the "data-carrying"
> pairs for power transmission and Alternative B Delivers power over the "spare
> pairs"?
> 
> On my understanding of the 2022 standard the definition is: 
> - Alternative A is for pinout conductors 1, 2, 3 and 6
> - Alternative B is for pinout conductors 4, 5, 7, 8.
> 
> Then indeed if we are in 10/100BaseT Alternative A are "data-carrying
> pairs" and Alternative B are "spare pairs" but that's not the case on
> 1000BaseT.
> 
> You can see it in the figures in the paragraph 145.2.3.

Please, re-read my answer :)

Autoneg for 1000Mbit is not done on all 4 pairs. The only MDI/-X
dependent transfer processes only on one pair is autoneg. Every thing
else is extrapolated out of it.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |