On 5/30/19 1:46 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 5/30/19 1:29 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 11:33:33PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 5/28/19 11:22 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >>>>> The link detection on the TJA1100 (not TJA1101) seems unstable at best, >>>>> so I better use all the interrupt sources to nudge the PHY subsystem and >>>>> have it check the link change. >>>> >>>> Then it sounds like you should just ignore interrupts and stay will >>>> polling for the TJA1100. >>> >>> Polling for the link status change is slow(er) than the IRQ driven >>> operation, so I would much rather use the interrupts. >> >> I agree about the speed, but it seems like interrupts on this PHY are >> not so reliable. Polling always works. But unfortunately, you cannot >> have both interrupts and polling to fix up problems when interrupts >> fail. Your call, do you think interrupts really do work? > > It works fine for me this way. And mind you, it's only the TJA1100 > that's flaky, the TJA1101 is better. > >> If you say that tja1101 works as expected, then please just use the >> link up/down bits for it. > > I still don't know which bits really trigger link status changes, so I'd > like to play it safe and just trigger on all of them. So what do we do here ? -- Best regards, Marek Vasut
