From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtpout-03.galae.net (smtpout-03.galae.net [185.246.85.4]) (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 E8E662836BE for ; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 12:32:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769085130; cv=none; b=aaGxyOUCBwqJNfQSpq+JynNASdd2i5R6cC+/8ej1TLCh/XZ9T4tlfLGwW+4WfWCJiWadYH651qohN2mGB5raWmkysVRNCc0MrvGWHwmFlahiemHxzDuxAp927YR4mw2fl2/8PXJF+DN1fFcBSCFvgr9OyiQLaWNIfeLMSlKS978= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769085130; c=relaxed/simple; bh=T0B4Aysngk9AYB4KDOXAjX7IYn1+hFLLAhtwfY5VegM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=l3d9NHb54u8E1uyhnirL/hx6+ypQzubjYZg1e/FCljV3Ctqe3S+vVLUFDt69TylpMGqZ1TTmtkLSlgDQdnd2HZairNWPySmC3kB+oAyzDbsxgeUmz7sEx4ewXltCpC4v4tzn8Tvy4fsUSLetS3dfQjN8KZyd8Uf9RC2/CAvoCl8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=dCzstjUZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.246.85.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="dCzstjUZ" Received: from smtpout-01.galae.net (smtpout-01.galae.net [212.83.139.233]) by smtpout-03.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 275194E421ED; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 12:32:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.galae.net (mail.galae.net [212.83.136.155]) by smtpout-01.galae.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D223C606B6; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 12:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 82C1D119B818B; Thu, 22 Jan 2026 13:31:57 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=dkim; t=1769085122; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-language:in-reply-to:references; bh=T0B4Aysngk9AYB4KDOXAjX7IYn1+hFLLAhtwfY5VegM=; b=dCzstjUZ64RDTZX168ppsHBo2JzipVo67yFaYYdRRcqgN1F1/a8NNC3XJjtzPGiiHhxyLT lLLyvrwbO4bQJpR/Y7YI0qnBp6ZTzSU+HTXtLMZnG4RHBZCzH+ohmytAKmuRlmzHKNLu8x YzjeJR+yBuxgHfwwi3CMxBqGsuvnZWVA46mRjGns0SEkrsF3LUmYqQ7WjSG1JpZAffjyKy itpTyWzmaleEJs81ObP6ePO2IEX+7IW3gWIL0iHPz5nfa4vuDEpv2sQr0oXjJEzLsGXgsP PpsllGLLV8P/+p5oosBNdDRF4SpAtDrqq8njrQH0fTJV1qujYUGoIk4gKhYz7A== Message-ID: <697e05a3-9ae0-4a84-88ed-9efba98316b1@bootlin.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 13:31:56 +0100 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: [PATCH RFC net-next v2 1/2] net: phy: marvell: 88e1111: define gigabit features To: "Russell King (Oracle)" Cc: Josua Mayer , Andrew Lunn , Heiner Kallweit , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260101-cisco-1g-sfp-phy-features-v2-0-47781d9e7747@solid-run.com> <20260101-cisco-1g-sfp-phy-features-v2-1-47781d9e7747@solid-run.com> From: Maxime Chevallier Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.3 On 21/01/2026 16:06, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > If you want to try and work out what the media side should be, then > I think we're basically going to end up needing our own database for > every transceiver out there... which leads us towards the model that > vendors use: only accepting transceivers we know about (which leads > to claims of "vendor lock-in" for this technology.) Does the current model of applying the fixups/quirks fits that bill of having some internal database ? Thing is, from my tests there are modules (e.g. Prolabs GLC-GE-100FX-C) where neither the eeprom nor the integrated PHY's reported capabilities are correct. The only reliable thing we have then is the SFP module's vendor_name + vendor_pn. >From then on, we may say "We trust whatever comes out of reading the eeprom + applying the quirks" ? Or am I relying too much on the quirks ? Maxime