netdev - Re: fixed phy -- how do we decide to use this code?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:25:14 +0400
From:	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
To:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Vitaly Bordug <vitb@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Linuxppc-dev Development <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fixed phy -- how do we decide to use this code?

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:20:14PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Apr 15, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 10:54:40AM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>> Vitaly, Anton
>>>
>>> You guys have used this code.. I was wondering how we decide to used 
>>> the
>>> fixed phy vs another phy.  Is this a runtime decision based on  
>>> something
>>> in the device tree or purely at compile time?
>>
>> It's specified via fixed-link property in the device tree.
>> The bindings described in Documentation/powerpc/dts-bindings/fsl/ 
>> tsec.txt.
>
> Ok, I want to make sure I can build a platform that uses a normal PHY  
> that is detected (like a marvell PHY) and and have another platform that 
> is fixed-link in the same kernel image.  Sounds like we'll be ok.

Yep, that will work.

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
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