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:   Fri, 8 Oct 2021 07:21:24 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <>
To:     Ansuel Smith <>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <>,
        Vivien Didelot <>,
        Florian Fainelli <>,
        Vladimir Oltean <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Rob Herring <>,
        Heiner Kallweit <>,
        Russell King <>,,,
Subject: Re: [net PATCH v2 01/15] drivers: net: phy: at803x: fix resume for
 QCA8327 phy

On Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:45:51 +0200 Ansuel Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 07:23:04PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri,  8 Oct 2021 02:22:11 +0200 Ansuel Smith wrote:  
> > > From Documentation phy resume triggers phy reset and restart
> > > auto-negotiation. Add a dedicated function to wait reset to finish as
> > > it was notice a regression where port sometime are not reliable after a
> > > suspend/resume session. The reset wait logic is copied from phy_poll_reset.
> > > Add dedicated suspend function to use genphy_suspend only with QCA8337
> > > phy and set only additional debug settings for QCA8327. With more test
> > > it was reported that QCA8327 doesn't proprely support this mode and
> > > using this cause the unreliability of the switch ports, especially the
> > > malfunction of the port0.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 52a6cdbe43a3 ("net: phy: at803x: add resume/suspend function to qca83xx phy")  
> > 
> > Strange, checkpatch catches the wrong hash being used, but the
> > verify_fixes script doesn't. Did you mean:
> > 
> > Fixes: 15b9df4ece17 ("net: phy: at803x: add resume/suspend function to qca83xx phy")
> > 
> > Or is 52a6cdbe43a3 the correct commit hash? Same question for patch 2.
> > 
> > 
> > The fixes have to be a _separate_ series.  
> this series contains changes that depends on the fixes. (the 4th patch
> that rename the define is based on this 2 patch) How to handle that?
> I know it was wrong to put net and net-next patch in the same series but
> I don't know how to handle this strange situation. Any hint about that?

If there is a functional dependency you'll need to send the net changes
first and then wait until the trees are merged before sending net-next
changes. Merge usually happens Thursday afternoon (pacific). You can
post the net-next changes as RFC before the trees get merged to make
sure they are reviewed and ready to go in.

> About the wrong hash, yes I wrongly took the hash from my local branch.

Indeed, looks like our checker got broken hence my confusion.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists