netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 02/13] phy: add the mvebu cp110 comphy driver

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:39:22 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kishon@...com, jason@...edaemon.net,
        sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
        gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com,
        thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, nadavh@...vell.com,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mw@...ihalf.com, stefanc@...vell.com,
        miquel.raynal@...e-electrons.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/13] phy: add the mvebu cp110 comphy driver

> +static const struct mvebu_comhy_conf mvebu_comphy_modes[] = {
> +	/* lane 0 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(0, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 1 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(1, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 2 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 3 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(3, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2),
> +	/* lane 4 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x2),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 5 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(5, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +};

Do other Marvell SoCs re-use this IP? Maybe add cp110 to the name here
to indicate what SoC this configuration belongs to? I guess at some
point, the compatible string will be used to select the correct table
for the hardware variant.

> +static const struct of_device_id mvebu_comphy_of_match_table[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "marvell,comphy-cp110" },

Is that specific enough? It seems like this table is easy to change in
the VHDL. Could there be another cp110 with a different configuration?

    Andrew