[PATCH RFC net-next] net: stmmac: provide flag to disable EEE

[Laurent Pinchart]

On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 01:18:33AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 12:17:06AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 10:23:45PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 08:54:52PM +0200, Ovidiu Panait wrote:
> > > > If not, maybe this patch could be merged to add the flag that disables
> > > > EEE and I will just send a patch to disable EEE on our platforms as well.
> > > 
> > > We still need the flag to disable EEE for platforms where lpi_intr_o is
> > > logically OR'd with the other interrupts, so there's no way to ignore
> > > its persistent assertion.
> > 
> > I'll also state that we need both patches, but there's no point pushing
> > my original patch (to allow EEE to be disabled) unless Laurent is going
> > to also submit a patch to make use of the flag - the EEE disable and
> > Laurent's patch needs to be part of a series. We don't merge stuff that
> > adds facilities that have no users, because that's been proven time and
> > time again to be a recipe for accumulating cruft.
> 
> Sorry for having dropped the ball on this. Your patch arrived just when
> I travelled to Japan for a month, and then it got burried in my inbox.
> Now that it has resurfaced, and that an issue that prevented i.MX8MP
> from booting with v6.19-rc has been fixed, I'll rebase my kernel and
> finally fix that problem.

Done. https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260208232931.2272237-1-laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com

> Once again, thank you for all your help with this issue, you have been
> extremely helpful and I'm very grateful.
> 
> > So, at the moment, "net: stmmac: provide flag to disable EEE" ain't
> > going anywhere until there's a patch that makes use of the new flag.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart