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

[Song, Yoong Siang]

> > > > Yes, you are right. I missed the effect of get_wol.
> > > > Is it needed in future to implement link change interrupt in phy
> > > > driver? Cause I dint see much phy driver implement link change
> > > > interrupt.
> > >
> > > If there is a board that has interrupt pin wired correctly from the
> > > PHY and the interrupt controller is safe to use (i.e. it is not a
> > > PCA953x which cannot handle interrupt storms correctly), then I
> > > think the PHY driver should use the interrupt, instead of polling.
> > >
> > > Marek
> >
> > Any suggestion to avoid the conflict of "WoL on link change" mentioned by
> Russell?
> > Is it make sense to create a new member called wolopts under struct
> > phy_device to track the WoL status and return the correct status in get_wol
> callback?
> 
> I really think you need to look at your PMC and see if you can make it an
> interrupt controller. You only need level interrupts, not edge. So the
> microcontroller in the PMC could just poll the GPIO. There appears to be a
> simple IPC between the host and PMC, so just extend it with a couple of
> registers, interrupt state, interrupt mask, and make use of the existing
> interrupt between the host and PMC.
> 
>     Andrew

Thanks for your suggestion. Currently, PMC is designed for platform-wide
power management and not meant to control any device specific registers.
Seem like it is not possible to make PMC an interrupt controller, but I will
continue to discuss more with my team.

Regards
Siang