linux-kernel - Re: [RFC next v1 0/5] stmmac: honor the GPIO flags for the PHY reset GPIO

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:   Mon, 10 Jun 2019 14:31:17 +0200
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
        peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com,
        joabreu@...opsys.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>, khilman@...libre.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC next v1 0/5] stmmac: honor the GPIO flags for the PHY reset GPIO

Hi Maxime,

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 1:47 PM Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2019 at 10:45:10PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > Patch #1 and #4 are minor cleanups which follow the boyscout rule:
> > > "Always leave the campground cleaner than you found it."
> >
> > > I
> > > am also looking for suggestions how to handle these cross-tree changes
> > > (patch #2 belongs to the linux-gpio tree, patches #1, 3 and #4 should
> > > go through the net-next tree. I will re-send patch #5 separately as
> > > this should go through Kevin's linux-amlogic tree).
> >
> > Patches 1 and 4 don't seem to have and dependencies. So i would
> > suggest splitting them out and submitting them to netdev for merging
> > independent of the rest.
>
> Jumping on the occasion of that series. These properties have been
> defined to deal with phy reset, while it seems that the PHY core can
> now handle that pretty easily through generic properties.
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense to just move to that generic properties
> that already deals with the flags properly?
thank you for bringing this up!
if anyone else (just like me) doesn't know about it, there are generic
bindings defined here: [0]

I just tested this on my X96 Max by defining the following properties
inside the PHY node:
  reset-delay-us = <10000>;
  reset-assert-us = <10000>;
  reset-deassert-us = <10000>;
  reset-gpios = <&gpio GPIOZ_15 (GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW | GPIO_OPEN_DRAIN)>;

that means I don't need any stmmac patches which seems nice.
instead I can submit a patch to mark the snps,reset-gpio properties in
the dt-bindings deprecated (and refer to the generic bindings instead)
what do you think?


Martin


[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt?id=b54dd90cab00f5b64ed8ce533991c20bf781a3cd#n58