Re: [PATCH net-next v4 14/17] dt-bindings: net: pse-pd: Add bindings for PD692x0 PSE controller

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 17 Feb 2024 13:14:29 +0100
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 05:02:55PM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote:
> > Add the PD692x0 I2C Power Sourcing Equipment controller device tree
> > bindings documentation.
> > 
> > This patch is sponsored by Dent Project <dentproject@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---  
> ...
> > +        pse_pis {
> > +          #address-cells = <1>;
> > +          #size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > +          pse_pi0: pse_pi@0 {
> > +            reg = <0>;
> > +            #pse-cells = <0>;
> > +            pairset-names = "alternative-a", "alternative-b";
> > +            pairsets = <&phys0>, <&phys1>;
> > +          };
> > +          pse_pi1: pse_pi@1 {
> > +            reg = <1>;
> > +            #pse-cells = <0>;
> > +            pairset-names = "alternative-a";
> > +            pairsets = <&phys2>;  
> 
> According to latest discussions, PSE PI nodes will need some
> additional, board specific, information:
> - this controller do not implements polarity switching, we need to know
>   what polarity is implemented on this board. The 802.3 spec provide not
>   really consistent names for polarity configurations:
>   - Alternative A MDI-X
>   - Alternative A MDI
>   - Alternative B X
>   - Alternative B S
>   The board may implement one of polarity configurations per alternative
>   or have additional helpers to switch them without using PSE
>   controller.
>   Even if specification explicitly say:
>   "The PD shall be implemented to be insensitive to the polarity of the power
>    supply and shall be able to operate per the PD Mode A column and the PD
>    Mode B column in Table 33–13"
>   it is possible to find reports like this:
>   https://community.ui.com/questions/M5-cant-take-reversed-power-polarity-/d834d9a8-579d-4f08-80b1-623806cc5070
> 
>   Probably this kind of property is a good fit:
>   polarity-supported = "MDI-X", "MDI", "X", "S";

This property should be on the PD side.
Isn't it better to name it "polarity-provided" for each PSE PIs binding? What
do you think?
We agreed that it is mainly for ethtool to show the polarity of a PI, right?

Regards,
-- 
Köry Maincent, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux