linux-kernel - Re: [RFC net-next PATCH 06/16] net: phylink: Add function for optionally adding a PCS

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: <YVxWaif9jE/fCE0O@lunn.ch>
Date:   Tue, 5 Oct 2021 15:43:06 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next PATCH 06/16] net: phylink: Add function for
 optionally adding a PCS

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 10:51:38AM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 03:15:17PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > This adds a function to set the PCS only if there is not one currently
> > set. The intention here is to allow MAC drivers to have a "default" PCS
> > (such as an internal one) which may be used when one has not been set
> > via the device tree. This allows for backwards compatibility for cases
> > where a PCS was automatically attached if necessary.
> 
> I'm not sure I entirely like this approach. Why can't the network
> driver check for the pcs-handle property and avoid using its
> "default" if present?

And that would also be in line with

ethernet/freescale/dpaa2/dpaa2-mac.c:	node = fwnode_find_reference(dpmac_node, "pcs-handle", 0);

We need a uniform meaning of pcs-handle. And dpaa2-mac.c has set the
precedent that the MAC uses it, not phylink. That can however be
changed, if it make sense, but both users should do the same.

	 Andrew