linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: macb: Add support for phy-handle binding

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, 17 Feb 2016 13:55:15 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nathan@...hanrossi.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	nicolas.ferre@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: macb: Add support for phy-handle binding

From: Nathan Rossi <nathan@...hanrossi.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 04:44:35 +1000

> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 3:14 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> All of these special cases we use (all the DT bindings are in text
>> files in the kernel sources, we control all of the bootloaders, etc.)
>> is the most shaky foundation I've ever seen upon which to erect a
>> stable device probing mechanism.
>>
>> I'm not applying this patch until you add an error handling path from
>> the of_phy_connect() call that will do the existing PHY probing sequence
>> by hand using phy_find_first().
> 
> I am not quite sure how to handle that in a way such as to also allow
> for the probe deferral in the event that the phydev/mdio bus which the
> phy-handle points at is not yet probed itself. But I guess the real
> question is whether or not to handle the deferral at all?

I think we need some experts in this area to chime in on this issue.