linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] net-next: stmmac: support future possible different internal phy mode

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]

Message-ID: <20170728142508.GA7221@Red>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:25:08 +0200
From:   Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, wens@...e.org,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, peppe.cavallaro@...com,
        alexandre.torgue@...com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        icenowy@...c.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net-next: stmmac: support future possible different
 internal phy mode

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 03:55:44PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:28:15AM +0200, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> > Hello
> > 
> > The current way to find if the phy is internal is to compare DT phy-mode
> > and emac_variant/internal_phy.
> > But it will negate a possible future SoC where an external PHY use the
> > same phy mode than the internal one.
> > 
> > This patchs series adds a new way to find if the PHY is internal, via its
> > compatible.
> 
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/of/of_mdio.c#L144
> 
> Since you also have "ethernet-phy-ieee802.3-c22", you won't get the
> warning. But still, your device tree gives the wrong idea.
> 
> I've probably asked this before: Does the internal PHY use a different
> PHY ID in registers 2 and 3?
> 

yes

reg2: 0x0044
reg3: 0X1500

Regards