netdev - Re: genphy_read_status() vs. 1000bT Pause capability

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

Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2017 22:11:24 +1100
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: genphy_read_status() vs. 1000bT Pause capability

On Tue, 2017-03-28 at 10:42 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> The 1000X definitions are for 1000BaseX (fiber), not for 1000BaseT
> (copper).
> 
> I have a working setup here with gigabit pause.  The pause bits come
> from bits 11 and 10, just like for older copper PHYs.  Your link
> parter is indicating that it has no pause capability.  That means
> you can't use pause.

Interesting. I tried and it worked :-) Could be something funny in
the config of our switches.

Thanks for the explanation.

Cheers,
Ben.