Hi Russell,
Thank you for pointing that out.
I will fix it and send out version 2.
On 22/6/2023 11:06 pm, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 04:43:51PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:19:02PM +0800, Choong Yong Liang wrote:
From: "Tan, Tee Min" <tee.min.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Add cur_link_an_mode into phy_device struct for PHY drivers to
communicate the in-band AN mode setting with phylink framework.
As there is a mechanism in PHY drivers to switch the PHY interface
between SGMII and 2500BaseX according to link speed. In this case,
the in-band AN mode should be switching based on the PHY interface
as well, if the PHY interface has been changed/updated by PHY driver.
For e.g., disable in-band AN in 2500BaseX mode, or enable in-band AN
back for SGMII mode (10/100/1000Mbps).
Signed-off-by: Tan, Tee Min <tee.min.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Choong Yong Liang <yong.liang.choong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
...
diff --git a/include/linux/phy.h b/include/linux/phy.h
index 11c1e91563d4..c685b526e307 100644
--- a/include/linux/phy.h
+++ b/include/linux/phy.h
@@ -756,6 +756,8 @@ struct phy_device {
/* MACsec management functions */
const struct macsec_ops *macsec_ops;
#endif
+ /* For communicate the AN mode setting with phylink framework. */
+ u8 cur_link_an_mode;
};
Hi Choong Yong Liang,
Please consider adding cur_link_an_mode to the kernel doc
for struct phy_device - which is above the definition of struct phy_device.
This looks like it's grabbing something from phylink and stuffing it
into phylib. However, I have no idea, because I don't seem to have
received the original patches. I'm guessing the reason is:
2023-06-22 05:21:24 1qCBoy-0003ji-G9 H=mga03.intel.com
[134.134.136.65]:57703 I=[78.32.30.218]:25
X=TLS1.2:ECDHE_SECP521R1__RSA_SHA512__AES_256_GCM:256
F=<yong.liang.choong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> rejected after DATA: unqualified
address not permitted: failing address in "Cc:" header is: Tan
Which I suspect came from:
Tan, Tee Min <tee.min.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
and someone doesn't realise that a "," in the display-name part of
an address *must* be quoted, otherwise "," is taken to be a separator
in the address list.
Consequently, it has now become:
Tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Tee Min <tee.min.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
It should have been:
"Tan, Tee Min" <tee.min.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
with the double-quotes.
Please do not review this series further, but instead, please can the
author repost it forthwith with correct conformant headers so that a
proper review can be undertaken by all?
Thanks.
