From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.nabladev.com (mx.nabladev.com [178.251.229.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A6503C9EDD; Fri, 16 Oct 2026 19:31:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.251.229.89 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792179066; cv=none; b=XHE+bgtCsFgJ4rhyTAXXZc8k5hv7ksp7dA3jZChWTUK0Ra9mgPiccafGK+51j5dOZQaa+GCY1gIRbYW3RCzJQpGLuucc51ukJCu0U+3G7e1zJAStI0T/qUOkzj22PQdUDqQIEdQah5JonN6/gxn3cPLlhWXOCFRALgh6LjbZBPU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792179066; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jSXmpReOEzXUc0JLxH//R7dvy92YyevKFQJHdUiv4Nw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=r6oxpONgXJRYxnFsY1GE4lnal/w/35Qk9ocHyqq/gtVX09y5Xooz98A1tL29/FP/DWVwZU+bif1/UW9X3r+M7azjLHexkuQVQXrQ+uZiUWcZdCdyQ3FbfwSqbMEpd/3Ra15ihlbBTgIgys4FKA0yVDWXV7D3w6Ue6YM2Y+SlGCM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=nabladev.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nabladev.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nabladev.com header.i=@nabladev.com header.b=T7Ztns9D; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.251.229.89 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=nabladev.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nabladev.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nabladev.com header.i=@nabladev.com header.b="T7Ztns9D" Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 9FF53106175; Fri, 16 Oct 2026 21:31:00 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nabladev.com; s=dkim; t=1792179061; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-language:in-reply-to:references; bh=yMIPWPPkArNb9QBk2Pp7fUcT9jQ4pAJbPTXYT4LYX0I=; b=T7Ztns9DPAV83p6VQfRINYMKx3JnnbG/KKmRFAGl1TbX+2Al7o2Z7KLbkrOzNpb1cCSyWn 5IbNqAUuRoWSkvtziV39cvVFlcwvUD1dN+Krz9nbhN/76Wd+6hlFkglwRh6bLMxOIy2xl5 eWLGNn6f2cKA5l8r7clhU4WE7CSZzEoXrmwCRHcIyMiZQ2zp6Yg/92z7Kkf2/JQZWrS3iS f+bSeUsgBKkYFmhAkIwLogegO+WbkMy9O0eESd5eQJPd/A+5F/HFUAb5+SLrLSUFqGkHks JesplQMwRACEK2XcSe1cbktoP8ucSUmWiJscu9KmrMGWfT8ZZjOuG1td1YUfWQ== Message-ID: <39d85490-d6e4-4bd1-a539-94cb34c31cea@nabladev.com> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 20:20:16 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [net-next,PATCH] enetc: Set eMDIO MDC rate to 2.5 MHz only on i.MX95 To: Wei Fang , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" Cc: "David S. Miller" , Andrew Lunn , Clark Wang , Claudiu Manoil , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Vladimir Oltean , "imx@lists.linux.dev" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20261001223947.60189-1-marex@nabladev.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Marek Vasut In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 On 10/8/26 5:24 AM, Wei Fang wrote: >> static const struct pci_device_id enetc_pci_mdio_id_table[] = { >> - { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FREESCALE, ENETC_MDIO_DEV_ID) }, >> - { PCI_DEVICE(NETC_EMDIO_VEN_ID, NETC_EMDIO_DEV_ID) }, >> + { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_FREESCALE, ENETC_MDIO_DEV_ID), 0, 0, >> 258 }, >> + { PCI_DEVICE(NETC_EMDIO_VEN_ID, NETC_EMDIO_DEV_ID), 0, 0, 66 }, >> { 0, } /* End of table. */ >> }; > > No, please do not add the divisor to the driver_data. All NETC v4 devices > use the same vendor ID and device ID, but their system clock may be > different. So the divisor is different as well. > > In addition to EMDIO, the ENETC port and NETC switch port also support > virtual MDIO, which uses their own MDIO registers to access the external > PHY. Therefore, the modifications go far beyond this. > > If you don't mind, I can add a patch set to address this issue later. You can > simply revert the commit 587acb86d646 "enetc: Increase eMDIO MDC rate > to 2.5 MHz". I am tempted to do that at this point, but the MX95 would then be incompatible with TJA1120 which does not work for me. But isn't the PCI_DEVICE(NETC_EMDIO_VEN_ID, NETC_EMDIO_DEV_ID) compatible ONLY with the MX95, so this would restore the behavior on non-MX95 and fix up MX95 only ?