linux-kernel - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ARM: imx6plus: enable internal routing of clk_enet

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: <AM6PR0402MB360700E4C52AE36CC3176622FF6F0@AM6PR0402MB3607.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:24:42 +0000
From:   Andy Duan <fugang.duan@....com>
To:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
CC:     Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ARM: imx6plus: enable internal routing
 of clk_enet_ref where possible

From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 10:26 PM
> Hi Sven,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:40 AM Sven Van Asbroeck
> <thesven73@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > Thank you for testing this out on a different platform !
> >
> > I had a look at how things are done in the Freescale fork of the
> > kernel
> > (5.4.24_2.1.0) and I noticed that this kernel has almost the same
> > behaviour as this proposed patch: the GPR5 bit is _always_ set on a
> > plus. The code does not check how the enet clock is generated.
> >
> > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsour
> >
> ce.codeaurora.org%2Fexternal%2Fimx%2Flinux-imx%2Ftree%2Farch%2Farm
> %2Fm
> >
> ach-imx%2Fmach-imx6q.c%3Fh%3Drel_imx_5.4.24_2.1.0%26id%3Dbabac00
> 8e5cf1
> >
> 68abca1a85bda2e8071ca27a5c0%23n269&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cfugang.d
> uan%40nx
> >
> p.com%7C8570de0304514796ea0208d81c385a11%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92
> cd99c5c3
> >
> 01635%7C0%7C1%7C637290375659016888&amp;sdata=I9werBT%2FDkcWu
> LEKlFVzRi2
> > KD%2FLwPz2QCqw%2BHn0HY8U%3D&amp;reserved=0
> >
> > Now, I'm assuming that the sabresd-plus can run on the Freescale
> > kernel fork. The GPR5 bit will always be set there.
> 
> Just tested 5.4.24_2.1.0 on an imx6qp sabresd and DHCP also fails there.

Fabio, we have LAVA daily test by networking for imx6qp sabresd board, no any issue found.
Please double check the issue on your local.