linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 net-next] net: marvell: prestera: add phylink support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 09:33:52 +0000
From:   Oleksandr Mazur <oleksandr.mazur@...ision.eu>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Yevhen Orlov <yevhen.orlov@...ision.eu>,
        Taras Chornyi <taras.chornyi@...ision.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next] net: marvell: prestera: add phylink support


Hello Russel,

First of all - sorry for the inconveniences with the rush of new versioned-patches, my bad; won't happen again

As for the comments:

> I didn't specifically ask about the ifdefs - I asked the general
> question about "why make phylink conditional for this driver".
> Yes, v1 had ifdefs. v2 does not, but phylink is _still_ conditional.
> You are introduing lots of this pattern of code:

Sorry i think i misunderstood your question of the <conditional> use of phylink driver.
The reason is the following: the current state of things with ports is that PHY ports are controlled by FW,
and we're using phylink only for SFP ports. We don't have an PHY regs read/write invocation interfaces from driver right now,
and thus PHY ports control is limited to controlling them from FW side only, for now.

> 3. As for AN restart, no, it's not yet supported by our FW as of now.
> Maybe put a comment in the code to that effect?
That would make sense, i will add a comment in the next patch version.