Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-93366-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 07:03:39 +0100
From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To: Arun.Ramadoss@microchip.com
Cc: kuba@kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, kernel@pengutronix.de,
	olteanv@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net, Woojung.Huh@microchip.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
	f.fainelli@gmail.com, edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: make sure drive strength
 configuration is not lost by soft reset
Message-ID: <ZegHO_PqO-3qwFMQ@pengutronix.de>
References: <20240305064802.2478971-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
 <20240305191457.37419bd4@kernel.org>
 <935b7bd6fe116291ff5f1f5a7a52cdad89e4607a.camel@microchip.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <935b7bd6fe116291ff5f1f5a7a52cdad89e4607a.camel@microchip.com>

On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 03:29:32AM +0000, Arun.Ramadoss@microchip.com wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
> 
> On Tue, 2024-03-05 at 19:14 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> > know the content is safe
> > 
> > On Tue,  5 Mar 2024 07:48:02 +0100 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > This driver has two separate reset sequence in different places:
> > > - gpio/HW reset on start of ksz_switch_register()
> > > - SW reset on start of ksz_setup()
> > > 
> > > The second one will overwrite drive strength configuration made in
> > > the
> > > ksz_switch_register().
> > > 
> > > To fix it, move ksz_parse_drive_strength() from
> > > ksz_switch_register() to
> > > ksz_setup().
> > > 
> > > Fixes: d67d7247f641 ("net: dsa: microchip: Add drive strength
> > > configuration")
> > > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
> > 
> > Hm, this is much larger than I anticipated, and also doesn't apply,
> > so there will be conflict with -next. Andrew, should we go back to
> > the v1?
> 
> Suggestion: Instead of moving ksz_parse_drive_strength() from end of
> file to above, can we move ksz_setup() & ksz_teardown() down. So that
> the changes will be minimal. Will that work?

This will make it hard portable to stable too. As alternative I can
offer to use v1 patch for stable and send bigger patch for next after
in the next net-next window.

-- 
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 |