| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 4, 2012 8:03 am | |
| Adrian Chadd | Jan 4, 2012 9:07 am | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 4, 2012 1:59 pm | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 5, 2012 12:52 pm | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 6, 2012 4:56 am | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 6, 2012 5:02 am | .diff |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 6, 2012 10:27 am | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 6, 2012 12:35 pm | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 6, 2012 1:47 pm | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 6, 2012 1:52 pm | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 8, 2012 5:00 am | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 8, 2012 2:27 pm | |
| Adrian Chadd | Jan 10, 2012 5:18 pm | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 11, 2012 11:37 am | |
| Adrian Chadd | Jan 14, 2012 8:15 pm | |
| Warner Losh | Jan 14, 2012 9:13 pm | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 20, 2012 3:08 pm | .patch |
| Warner Losh | Jan 20, 2012 5:43 pm | |
| Oleksandr Tymoshenko | Jan 20, 2012 8:12 pm | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 21, 2012 4:02 am | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Jan 21, 2012 5:12 am | |
| Oleksandr Tymoshenko | Jan 23, 2012 11:45 pm | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Jan 24, 2012 5:53 am | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 25, 2012 2:17 pm | |
| Warner Losh | Jan 25, 2012 2:28 pm | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 25, 2012 3:21 pm | |
| Hans Petter Selasky | Jan 26, 2012 8:24 am | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 26, 2012 8:24 am | |
| Stefan Bethke | Jan 26, 2012 8:30 am | |
| Marius Strobl | Jan 27, 2012 6:15 am | |
| Adrian Chadd | Feb 10, 2012 9:22 pm | |
| Marius Strobl | Feb 11, 2012 3:17 am | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Feb 11, 2012 4:45 am | |
| Adrian Chadd | Feb 11, 2012 4:59 pm | |
| Warner Losh | Feb 11, 2012 5:15 pm | |
| Adrian Chadd | Feb 11, 2012 8:48 pm | |
| Warner Losh | Feb 11, 2012 8:58 pm | |
| Juli Mallett | Feb 11, 2012 9:05 pm | |
| Adrian Chadd | Feb 11, 2012 9:19 pm | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Feb 12, 2012 9:51 am | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Feb 12, 2012 10:04 am | |
| Juli Mallett | Feb 12, 2012 10:30 am | |
| Aleksandr Rybalko | Feb 12, 2012 10:38 am |
| Subject: | Re: Extending sys/dev/mii | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Adrian Chadd (adr...@freebsd.org) | |
| Date: | Jan 4, 2012 9:07:51 am | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-arch | |
I'm including -net here so we can try and pull in further feedback from network-cluey people.
On 4 January 2012 08:03, Stefan Bethke <st...@lassitu.de> wrote:
As discussed recently, ray@, adrian@ and myself are trying to get a framework
and utility into the tree that allows the use and configuration of ethernet
switch chips. The switch controllers we've looked at so far share a number of
features, in particular they use 802.3 MII, MDIO and PHYs to implement and
configure the ports they offer. In addition to being a switch, some of them
also offer one of the built-in PHYs to the ethernet controller as a classical
PHY.
[snip]
I'd like to extend miibus in such a way that the one-to-one mapping between MDIO
and MII is broken up. For that, I propose to add a new bus driver "mdiobus"
(with appropriate resource management) that uses methods similar to miibus_if.m
readreg and writereg to access an ethernet controllers' MDIO master. miibus
then attaches to it as a child, claims one or more PHY addresses and attaches
PHYs to itself (as currently implemented).
This sounds like a good idea. I wonder what's stopping us from doing that. :)
There's one issue that I don't have a proposal for yet: in one platform
(AR7241), we have PHY4 of the SoC talking via MII to arge0's MAC, while it is
being controlled via the switch controller's MDIO master, and the switch
controller being attached to arge1's MDIO. If we want to attach an miibus for
PHY4, we'd have to defer attachment of arge0 until arge1 has been probed and can
provide the MDIO attachment (and transitively the switch and it's mdio). Note
that we also have boards without a switch, but the two PHYs still being attached
to only a single MDIO. One possible way would be for the MDIO driver to be
separate from the ethernet driver, so that the normal newbus dependency
resolution can be used to ensure that mdio1 is attached before arge0 is probed.
For the time being, I've worked around this through hackery in if_arge.c.
juli@ proposed something quite similar a few weeks ago. Now that I'm a little more clued up on this whole area, I now understand why she suggested it.
I'm happy with "hacky" being in if_arge for now (I mean, there already _is_ ..) but this work seems like the right path to take to bring sanity to this whole setup in the longer term.
Thanks for tackling this!
Adrian
_______________________________________________ free...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "free...@freebsd.org"






.diff