Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] net: mdio: scan bus based on bus capabilities for C22 and C45

[Klaus Kudielka]

On Sun, 2023-03-12 at 03:53 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > 
> > What you are proposing here would not show any improvement on the
> > Omnia, as only the 6 ports would be scanned - right? 
> 
> Correct. But their also should not of been any noticeable slow down,
> because there should not be any additional scanning when everything is
> described in DT. And the move of the MDIO bus registration from probe
> to setup should actually make it faster than before.
> 

But then, why *do* I see such a big difference on the Omnia?

mdiobus_scan_bus_c45() takes:
~2.7 seconds without phy_mask patch
~0.2 seconds with phy_mask patch

(It's not a big deal, but somehow strange)

Regards, Klaus


PS: There was another open question: How long does the first
unsuccessful mv88e6xxx_probe() take, when calling
mv88e6xxx_mdios_register() from mv88e6xxx_setup()?

I would say "negligible":

[    0.194414] mv88e6085 f1072004.mdio-mii:10: *** mv88e6xxx_probe call ***
[    0.194739] mv88e6085 f1072004.mdio-mii:10: switch 0x1760 detected: Marvell 88E6176, revision 1
[    0.208163] mv88e6085 f1072004.mdio-mii:10: *** mv88e6xxx_probe return -517 ***