linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net: phy: micrel: Remove latency from driver

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: <20220401133454.ic6jxnripuxjhp5g@soft-dev3-1.localhost>
Date:   Fri, 1 Apr 2022 15:34:54 +0200
From:   Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        <linux@...linux.org.uk>, <Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
        <richardcochran@...il.com>, <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net: phy: micrel: Remove latency from driver

The 04/01/2022 14:47, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 11:48:04AM +0200, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > Based on the discussions here[1], the PHY driver is the wrong place
> > to set the latencies, therefore remove them.
> >
> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/3/4/325
> >
> > Fixes: ece19502834d84 ("net: phy: micrel: 1588 support for LAN8814 phy")
> > Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
> 
> Thanks for the revert.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> 
> > -static struct kszphy_latencies lan8814_latencies = {
> > -     .rx_10          = 0x22AA,
> > -     .tx_10          = 0x2E4A,
> > -     .rx_100         = 0x092A,
> > -     .tx_100         = 0x02C1,
> > -     .rx_1000        = 0x01AD,
> > -     .tx_1000        = 0x00C9,
> > -};
> 
> What are the reset defaults of these? 

Those are actually the reset values.

> I'm just wondering if we should
> explicitly set them to 0, so we don't get into a mess where some
> vendor bootloader sets values but mainline bootloader does not,
> breaking a configuration where the userspace daemon does the correct?

It would be fine for me to set them to 0. But then definitely we need a
way to set these latencies from userspace.

> 
>          Andrew

-- 
/Horatiu