netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] PHY configuration for compatible issue

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:	Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:35:06 +0800
From:	"Guo-Fu Tseng" <cooldavid@...ldavid.org>
To:	AriesLee <AriesLee@...cron.com>,
	Aries Lee <ariesleeILan@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1]  PHY configuration for compatible issue

On Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:08:47 +0800, AriesLee wrote
> To perform PHY calibration and set a different EA value by chip ID,
> Whenever the NIC chip power on, ie booting or resuming, we need to
> force HW to calibrate PHY parameter again, and also set a proper EA
> value which gather from experiment.
> 
> Those procedures help to reduce compatible issues(NIC is unable to link
> up in some special case) in giga speed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: AriesLee <AriesLee@...cron.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c |  113 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- drivers/net/ethernet/jme.h 
> |   19 +++++++ 2 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
> index df3ab83..4d217b8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/jme.c
> @@ -1744,6 +1744,112 @@ jme_phy_off(struct jme_adapter *jme)
>  		jme_new_phy_off(jme);
>  }
> 
> +static void
> +jme_phy_specreg_read(struct jme_adapter *jme, u32 specreg, u32 *phy_data) 
> +{
> +	u32 phy_addr;
> +
> +	phy_addr = JM_PHY_SPEC_REG_READ | specreg;
> +	jme_mdio_write(jme->dev, jme->mii_if.phy_id, JM_PHY_SPEC_ADDR_REG,
> +			phy_addr);
> +	*phy_data = jme_mdio_read(jme->dev, jme->mii_if.phy_id,
> +			JM_PHY_SPEC_DATA_REG);
> +}
Is there any particular reason that you pass the address of reading data.
Instead of just returning the value? (phy_data)
It would be more consistent if you return the value in this kind of
read function.

Otherwise this path all seems to be OK to me. :)

Signed-off-by: Guo-Fu Tseng <cooldavid@...ldavid.org>

Guo-Fu Tseng

--
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