[U-Boot] [PATCH] net: phy: genphy: Allow overwriting features

[Alexey Brodkin]

Hi Joe,

On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 10:54 -0600, Joe Hershberger wrote:
> Hi Alexey,
> 
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:45 AM, Alexey Brodkin
> <Alexey.Brodkin at synopsys.com> wrote:
> > Hi Joe,
> > 
> > On Wed, 2015-12-23 at 19:44 +0300, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> > > From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > > 
> > > of_set_phy_supported allows overwiting hardware capabilities of
> > > a phy with values from the devicetree. This does not work with
> > > the genphy driver though because the genphys config_init function
> > > will overwrite all values adjusted by of_set_phy_supported. Fix
> > > this by initialising the genphy features in the phy_driver struct
> > > and in config_init just limit the features to the ones the hardware
> > > can actually support. The resulting features are a subset of the
> > > devicetree specified features and the hardware features.
> > > 
> > > This is a copy of the patch from Linux kernel, see
> > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c242a47238fa2a6a54af8a16e62b54e6e031d4bc
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer at pengutronix.de>
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin at synopsys.com>
> > > Cc: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at ni.com>
> > > ---
> > 
> > Any chance for that one to be applied?
> 
> I'll review when the merge window opens.
> 
> > This patch is required to implement phy max
> > speed limitation by subsequent patches.
> 
> Any reason you did not send as a series if there are dependencies?

I thought about putting some of those patches in one series initially but then
decided to send them separately.

Even though together they solve one particular problem (ability to
set phy speed limit) they are a bit different by their nature.

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560608/,
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560634/ and
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560635/ are back-ports from Linux kernel
and could be actually applied separately because they are not related to
each other.

Following two are really preparatory for implementing capping:
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560636/
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560637/

...in patch I actually forgot to send out... (will do it shortly).

And finally http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/560638/ really a plain fix
for DW GMAC driver which may happen in case of phy force set lower than
possible. So it will easily manifest if all above is applied.

That said it was conscious decision but probably incorrect one.

If you do think it all fits well in a series I'll re-send it that way.

-Alexey