-----Original Message-----
From: Joakim Tjernlund [mailto:joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:21 PM
To: Li Yang-r58472
Cc: linuxppc-dev Development; Netdev; Fleming Andy-afleming
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ucc_geth.c, make PHY device optional.

On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 11:42 +0800, Li Yang-r58472 wrote:

quoted

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org

[mailto:netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org] On

quoted

Behalf Of Joakim Tjernlund
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 8:52 AM
To: 'linuxppc-dev Development'; 'Netdev'; Li Yang-r58472
Subject: [PATCH] ucc_geth.c, make PHY device optional.

quoted

This patch makes the PHY optional for ucc_geth.c ethernet

driver.

quoted

quoted

quoted

This is useful to support a direct mii to mii connection to, for

example,

quoted

quoted

a onboard swicth.

Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund <redacted>

----

Hi Joakim,

I'm wondering if we really need to have the option to disable

phylib.

maybe, but it has to be dynamic too. I need to use PHY on UCC2 and mii
on UCC3 and UCC4.

quoted

Actually we have made phylib selected by default for ucc_geth.  Many

L2

quoted

switch chips have the capacity to be controlled.  Therefore they can

be

quoted

managed as a phy device.

Yes, they can be but why force a PHY impl. when its is of no use? The
only thing the eth driver needs from the it is speed and duplex. If
these are fixed, you don't need to talk with a PHY.

The driver needs to get and set the link speed/status on runtime (such
as for ethtool interface).  Currently this is implementation through
phydev interface.  IMHO, it will be easier to maintain if we only use
this standard interface, rather than use different interfaces for
different cases.

quoted

For the MII interface which is not
configurable, shouldn't we use the fixed phy support from Vitaly?

Well, I think the the fixed phy is great when your eth driver requires

a

PHY, but it is a workaround with extra processing overhead. IMHO the
best impl. is to make the PHY optional in the eth driver and as you

can

see from the patch, that was really simple.

I agree there is overhead. However, it will have the advantage of
abstracting all the PHY related stuff out of controller driver.

An useful extension would be to add a new propety in the DTS to hold
initial speed and duplex(perhaps extend phy-connection-type). This
would be useful for the fixed driver too as one could derive speed and
duplex for the fixed phy from that property instead of creating a

fixed

phy for each speed and duplex one want to support.

I agree that there should be a device node to configure it.  The current
fixed phy driver is a little bit too complex to emulate the register
access.  Maybe it's better to have a null phy driver which just reads
PHY capacity and status from device node.

- Leo