netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: smsc911x: If PHY doesn't have an interrupt then POLL

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 Jun 2016 10:56:51 -0500
From:	Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
To:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	steve.glendinning@...well.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: smsc911x: If PHY doesn't have an interrupt then POLL

On 06/14/2016 04:56 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 06/15/2016 12:53 AM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> If the interrupt configuration isn't set and we are using the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     It's never set, judging by the driver code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> internal phy, then we need to poll the phy to reliably detect
>>>>>>>> phy state changes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     What address your internal PHY is at? Mine is at 1, and things
>>>>>>> seem
>>>>>>> to work reliably after probing:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SMSC LAN8700 18000000.etherne:01: attached PHY driver [SMSC LAN8700]
>>>>>>> (mii_bus:phy_addr=18000000.etherne:01, irq=-1)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     I'm using the device tree on my board.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I'm back on the machine, this is what mine says without that
>>>>>> patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SMSC LAN911x Internal PHY 18000000.etherne:01: attached PHY driver
>>>>>> [SMSC
>>>>>> LAN911x Internal PHY] (mii_bus:phy_addr=18000000.etherne:01, irq=0)
>>>>>
>>>>>     Hum, that's unexpected... things are probably more complex that I
>>>>> thought. Do you have extra patches to this driver by changce?
>>>>
>>>> No, the initial kernel where the problem was discovered is
>>>> 4.5.2-301.fc24.aarch64, but I built a mainline 4.6, and modprobed the
>>>> driver
>>>> with the same effect.
>>>>
>>>> Although, now that I'm looking closer at phy_irq, I'm curious how it
>>>> works for
>>>> anyone else...
>>>
>>>     Does anything change when you comment out that memcpy()? It
>>> shouldn't probably...
>>
>>     Well that should change the irq to PHY_POLL by default rather than
>> the 0's
>> in the structure, which may be a better patch.
>
>     It shouldn't due to the wrong size. It should only overwrite IRQ and
> index 0, unless I'm mistaken.

	Oh, sizeof(pointer)==8 on arm64, yah in the arm32 case you dodge the 
bullet.
	I think the memcpy removal solves the problem, i'm also going to test 
moving the mii_probe and will post an updated patch.

	Thanks!