RE: [PATCH net-next 1/1] net: phy: marvell10g: Add WAKE_PHY support to WOL event

[Song, Yoong Siang]

> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:52:06AM +0000, Song, Yoong Siang wrote:
> > > > Agreed. If the interrupt register is being used, i think we need
> > > > this patchset to add proper interrupt support. Can you recommend a
> > > > board they can buy off the shelf with the interrupt wired up? Or
> > > > maybe Intel can find a hardware engineer to add a patch wire to
> > > > link the interrupt output to a SoC pin that can do interrupts.
> > >
> > > The only board I'm aware of with the 88x3310 interrupt wired is the
> > > Macchiatobin double-shot. :)
> > >
> > > I forget why I didn't implement interrupt support though - I
> > > probably need to revisit that. Sure enough, looking at the code I
> > > was tinkering with, adding interrupt support would certainly conflict with
> this patch.
> >
> > Hi Russell,
> >
> > For EHL board, both WoL interrupt and link change interrupt are the same
> pin.
> > Based on your knowledge, is this common across other platforms?
> 
> Other PHYs? Yes. WoL is just another interrupt, and any interrupt can wake
> the system, so longer as the interrupt controller can actually wake the
> system.
> 
> > Can we take set wol function as one of the ways to control the
> > interrupts?
> 
> WOl does not control the interrupt, it is an interrupt source. And you need to
> service it as an interrupt. So long as your PMC is also an interrupt controller,
> it should all work.
> 
> 	  Andrew

Sorry, I should not use the word "control". Actually what I am trying to said was
"can we take set_wol() as one of the ways to enable/disable link change interrupt?".
PMC is not an interrupt controller. I guess the confusion here is due to I am
using polling mode. Let me ask the question differently.

What is the conflict that will happen when interrupt support is added? 
I can help to add config_intr() and handle_interrupt() callback support
If they will help to solve the conflict.

Regards
Siang