On Sun, 2022-06-05 at 20:50 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 06:01:08PM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > On Thu, 2022-06-02 at 10:52 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 17:15:13 +0000 Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > > > What is "our HW", what kernel driver does it use and why can't the > > > > > kernel driver take care of making sure the device is not accessed > > > > > when it'd crash the system? > > > > > > > > It is a custom asic with some homegrown controller. The full config path is too complex for kernel too > > > > know and depends on user input. > > > > > > We have a long standing tradition of not caring about user space > > > drivers in netdev land. I see no reason to merge this patch upstream. > > > > This is not a user space driver. View it as a eth controller with a dum PHY > > which cannot convey link status. The kernel driver then needs help with managing carrier. > > Please post the MAC driver then. We don't really like changes to the > kernel without a user. You MAC driver would be such a user. That driver is far from kernel proper/upstream worthy .. > > Could you also tell us more about the PHY. What capabilities does it > have? I assume it is not C22 compatible. Does it at least have some > sort of indicator of link? What might make sense is to use the There is no PHY really, from kernels POV it is just a DMA engine and all the setup needed to setup the full path is in US. > fixed-link code. You can provide a callback which gives the actual > link status up/down. And the fixed-link driver looks like a real PHY, > so the MAC driver does not need to do anything special. The fixed PHY has the same problem as it uses the same sysfs I/F. I am just asking that the sysfs carrier I/F should be writeable and readable when I/F is DOWN. Now one cannot even read carrier status when I/F is down. > > Andrew
