netdev - Re: Marvell phy errata origins?

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, 25 Sep 2018 08:16:30 -0700
From:   Daniel Walker <danielwa@...co.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andy Fleming <afleming@...escale.com>,
        Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@...inx.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        HEMANT RAMDASI <hramdasi@...co.com>,
        "Julius Hemanth Pitti -X (jpitti - MONTA VISTA SOFTWARE INC at Cisco)" 
        <jpitti@...co.com>,
        "GokulChand Casheekar (gcasheek)" <gcasheek@...co.com>
Subject: Re: Marvell phy errata origins?

On 04/18/2017 07:04 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 06:16:33AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Cisco is using a Marvell 88E1112 phy. It seems to be fairly similar
>> to the 88E1111 which Harini added a fix for.
> 
> Hi Daniel
> 
> If you look at Marvell reference drive, DSDT, they are actually quite
> different. Different virtual cable tester, different downshift
> configuration, different packet generator, different loopback. I would
> say they are different generations of PHY.
> 
>> In Harini's commit
>> message for ,
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/net/phy/marvell.c?id=3ec0a0f10ceb
>>
>> "This function has a sequence accessing Page 5 and Register 31, both
>> of which are not defined or reserved for this PHY"

I hope this this thread isn't too old to bring back to life. So it seems 
that Harini found that m88e1111 did not need this errata, and Cisco 
previously found that Harini's patch fixed m88e1112, we included it 
internally for that reason

Now I'm getting reports that this errata fixes issues we're seeing on 
m88e1111. We see an interrupt storm without the errata, despite the 
errata not being defined in the datasheet.

I would just send a patch adding the errata, but because Harini removed 
it I guess we really need to suss out what's going on.

I've added Gokul who reported the issue to me. Is it possible that 
Harini and Cisco have different m88e1111 phys? Maybe there's an issue 
with how they are hooked up ?

Daniel