4.17-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [ Upstream commit 576cd32082351620a4e76b8babc4d5ae9b4bbb98 ] It was been observed that with a particular order of initialisation, the netdev can be up, but the SFP module still has its TX_DISABLE signal asserted. This occurs when the network device brought up before the SFP kernel module has been inserted by userspace. This occurs because sfp-bus layer does not hear about the change in network device state, and so assumes that it is still down. Set netdev->sfp when the upstream is registered to work around this problem. Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c @@ -349,7 +349,6 @@ static int sfp_register_bus(struct sfp_b } if (bus->started) bus->socket_ops->start(bus->sfp); - bus->netdev->sfp_bus = bus; bus->registered = true; return 0; } @@ -364,7 +363,6 @@ static void sfp_unregister_bus(struct sf if (bus->phydev && ops && ops->disconnect_phy) ops->disconnect_phy(bus->upstream); } - bus->netdev->sfp_bus = NULL; bus->registered = false; } @@ -440,6 +438,7 @@ static void sfp_upstream_clear(struct sf { bus->upstream_ops = NULL; bus->upstream = NULL; + bus->netdev->sfp_bus = NULL; bus->netdev = NULL; } @@ -468,6 +467,7 @@ struct sfp_bus *sfp_register_upstream(st bus->upstream_ops = ops; bus->upstream = upstream; bus->netdev = ndev; + ndev->sfp_bus = bus; if (bus->sfp) { ret = sfp_register_bus(bus);