Re: [PATCH net-next 2/9] ethtool: Expand Ethernet Power Equipment with PoE alongside PoDL
From: Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@bootlin.com>
Date: 2023-11-20 10:09:54
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-doc, lkml
+Oleksij Sorry forgot to CC you the series. Maybe you should add yourself to the MAINTAINERS of pse-pd drivers subsystem? On Sat, 18 Nov 2023 18:38:43 +0100 Andrew Lunn [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 03:01:34PM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote:quoted
In the current PSE interface for Ethernet Power Equipment, support is limited to PoDL. This patch extends the interface to accommodate the objects specified in IEEE 802.3-2022 145.2 for Power sourcing Equipment (PSE).Sorry for taking a while getting to these patches. Plumbers and other patches have been keeping me busy.
Don't worry you are doing a great job as a net maintainer and I won't raise any remarks on delay considering how you are doing your job. Thanks again for your review!!
I'm trying to get my head around naming... Is there some sort of hierarchy? Is PSE the generic concept for putting power down the cable? Then you have the sub-type PoDL, and the sub-type PoE?
In fact as we discussed with Oleksij I decided to keep the naming as close as possible to the IEEE 802.3 standard. On the standard the PODL is naming like this aPoDLPSE* (ex: aPoDLPSEAdminState) and the PSE is naming like this aPSE* (ex: aPSEAdminState) without any PoE prefix. Maybe it is due to PoE being supported before PoDL and they didn't expect the PoDL part.
quoted
struct pse_control_config { enum ethtool_podl_pse_admin_state podl_admin_control; + enum ethtool_pse_admin_state admin_control;When i look at this, it seems to me admin_control should be generic across all schemes which put power down the cable, and podl_admin_control is specific to how PoDL puts power down the cable. Since you appear to be adding support for a second way to put power down the cable, i would expect something like poe_admin_control being added here. But maybe that is in a later patch?
No as said above admin_control is for PoE and podl_admin_control is for PoDL. Maybe you prefer to use poe_admin_control, and add poe prefix in the poe variables. It will differ a bit from the IEEE standard naming but I agreed that it would be more understandable in the development part. I am open to the change. Oleksij do you agree? Regards, -- Köry Maincent, Bootlin Embedded Linux and kernel engineering https://bootlin.com