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  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, 17 Feb 2020 18:42:44 +0100
From:   Alexandre Belloni <>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <>,
        Nicolas Ferre <>,
        Antoine Ténart <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: macb: Properly handle phylink on at91rm9200

On 17/02/2020 16:56:44+0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:43:48AM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > at91ether_init was handling the phy mode and speed but since the switch to
> > phylink, the NCFGR register got overwritten by macb_mac_config().
> I don't think this actually explains anything - or at least I can't
> make sense of it with respect to your patch.
> You claim that the NCFGR register gets overwritten in macb_mac_config(),
> but I see that the NCFGR register is read-modify-write in there,
> whereas your new implementation below doesn't bother reading the
> present value.
> I think the issue you're referring to is the clearing of the PAE bit,
> which is also the RM9200_RMII for at91rm9200?

This is the issue, I'll rework the commit message.

> Next, there's some duplication of code introduced here - it seems
> that the tail end of macb_mac_link_down() and at91ether_mac_link_down()
> are identical, as are the tail end of macb_mac_link_up() and
> at91ether_mac_link_up().

I was split between having a new phylink_mac_ops instance or
differentiating in the various callbacks. If your preference is the
latter, I'm fine with that.

> > Add new phylink callbacks to handle emac and at91rm9200 properly.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7897b071ac3b ("net: macb: convert to phylink")
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <>
> > ---
> I posted a heads-up message last week about updates to phylink that
> I'll be submitting soon (most of the prerequisits have now been sent
> for review) which touch every phylink_mac_ops-using piece of code in
> the tree.  Unfortunately, this patch introduces a new instance that
> likely isn't going to get my attention, so it's going to create a
> subtle merge conflict between net-next and net trees unless we work
> out some way to deal with it.
> I'm just mentioning that so that some thought can be applied now
> rather than when it actually happens - especially as I've no way to
> test the changes that will be necessary for this driver.

Does that help if I change the callbacks instead of adding a new
phylink_mac_ops instance? I can also wait for your work and rebase on
top of that but that would mean that the fix will not get backported.

Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering

Powered by blists - more mailing lists