[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220424165228.4030aea6@thinkpad>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2022 16:52:28 +0200
From: Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org>
To: Nathan Rossi <nathan@...hanrossi.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Fix port_hidden_wait to account
for port_base_addr
On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 14:17:59 +0000
Nathan Rossi <nathan@...hanrossi.com> wrote:
> The other port_hidden functions rely on the port_read/port_write
> functions to access the hidden control port. These functions apply the
> offset for port_base_addr where applicable. Update port_hidden_wait to
> use the port_wait_bit so that port_base_addr offsets are accounted for
> when waiting for the busy bit to change.
>
> Without the offset the port_hidden_wait function would timeout on
> devices that have a non-zero port_base_addr (e.g. MV88E6141), however
> devices that have a zero port_base_addr would operate correctly (e.g.
> MV88E6390).
So basically the code is accessing the wrong register for devices with
non-zero port_base_addr. This means that the patch should have a Fixes
tag with the commit that introduced this bug, so that it gets
backported to relevant stable versions.
Could you resend with Fixes tag?
Marek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists