On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 07:09:04PM +0100, Robert Marko wrote: > On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 at 15:51, Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 12:49:34PM +0100, Robert Marko wrote: > > > Currently, we are checking whether the PHY package mode matches the > > > individual PHY interface modes at PHY package probe time, but at that time > > > we only know the PHY package mode and not the individual PHY interface > > > modes as of_get_phy_mode() that populates it will only get called once the > > > netdev to which PHY-s are attached to is being probed and thus this check > > > will always fail and return -EINVAL. > > > > > > So, lets move this check to .config_init_once as at that point individual > > > PHY interface modes should be populated. > > > > Just for my own understanding, not directly about this patch... > > > > priv->package_mode is about PSGMII vs QSGMII for one of the SERDES > > interfaces? We expect the individual PHYs sharing that interface to > > also indicate PSGMII or QSGMII? > > Yes, that is the idea, all of the individual PHY-s in the package > should be indicating > the same PHY interface mode. > > > > > But what about the other SERDES, which can be connected to an SFP > > cage. You would normally set that to SGMII, or 1000BaseX. When an SFP > > module is inserted, the correct interface mode is then determined from > > the contests of the EEPROM and the PCS needs to be reconfigured. So > > i'm just wondering how this check works in this situation? > > I just went to retest SFP support and it works as intended, as soon as the SFP > is inserted, PHY will get reconfigured to "combo" mode so that fifth PHY can > support both fiber (100Base-FX or 1000Base-X) or regular copper connections. > > So, the check will not interfere with SFP support. So for the port with the SFP you also have phy-mode of PSGMII or QSGMII? That then gets changed when the SFP is hot plugged? Andrew
