linux-kernel - [PATCH 5/6] net: phy: reset the PHY even if probe() is not implemented

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:   Fri, 26 Jun 2020 17:53:24 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] net: phy: reset the PHY even if probe() is not implemented

From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>

Currently we only call phy_device_reset() if the PHY driver implements
the probe() callback. This is not mandatory and many drivers (e.g.
realtek) don't need probe() for most devices but still can have reset
GPIOs defined. There's no reason to depend on the presence of probe()
here so pull the reset code out of the if clause.

Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
---
 drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c | 23 ++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
index 1b4df12c70ad..f6985db08340 100644
--- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
+++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
@@ -2690,16 +2690,13 @@ static int phy_probe(struct device *dev)
 
 	mutex_lock(&phydev->lock);
 
-	if (phydev->drv->probe) {
-		/* Deassert the reset signal */
-		phy_device_reset(phydev, 0);
+	/* Deassert the reset signal */
+	phy_device_reset(phydev, 0);
 
+	if (phydev->drv->probe) {
 		err = phydev->drv->probe(phydev);
-		if (err) {
-			/* Assert the reset signal */
-			phy_device_reset(phydev, 1);
+		if (err)
 			goto out;
-		}
 	}
 
 	/* Start out supporting everything. Eventually,
@@ -2761,6 +2758,10 @@ static int phy_probe(struct device *dev)
 	phydev->state = PHY_READY;
 
 out:
+	/* Assert the reset signal */
+	if (err)
+		phy_device_reset(phydev, 1);
+
 	mutex_unlock(&phydev->lock);
 
 	return err;
@@ -2779,12 +2780,12 @@ static int phy_remove(struct device *dev)
 	sfp_bus_del_upstream(phydev->sfp_bus);
 	phydev->sfp_bus = NULL;
 
-	if (phydev->drv && phydev->drv->remove) {
+	if (phydev->drv && phydev->drv->remove)
 		phydev->drv->remove(phydev);
 
-		/* Assert the reset signal */
-		phy_device_reset(phydev, 1);
-	}
+	/* Assert the reset signal */
+	phy_device_reset(phydev, 1);
+
 	phydev->drv = NULL;
 
 	return 0;
-- 
2.26.1