lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:09:51 +1000 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> To: M B <super.firetwister@...glemail.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org> Subject: Re: Phy read timeout in ibm_new_emac driver > My Micrel/Kendin KSZ8721BT on my ppc405EP board needs one us longer to > finish. I was able to reproduce this all the time. So I wonder if the > timeout of 100us is defined by the MII standard, or by the author of > the driver? > If it's a standard I've still a bad feeling if we just correct the > timeout to 100us, maybe 110 should be fine. If it's not defined by the > standard, I would add 50% to the timeout. It won't slow down other > phys, but a scan on the phy bus might get slowed down. > Same applies for __emac_mdio_write. > > Oh and we could save a us by putting the udelay(1) after the if section ;-) Increasing the timeout is fine. In fact, EMAC specifically can sleep in it's MDIO access routines (it already takes mutexes) so maybe a good option here is to use longer sleeping delays and less iterations. Somebody knows off hand what the standard says the timeout should be ? I can check that tomorrow, I don't have it at hand right now and it's getting late but feel free to beat me to it :-) Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists