linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] net: dsa: microchip: Fix PHY loopback configuration for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873

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: <35045f6ef6a5b274063186c065a8215088b94cd5.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:52:57 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com>
Cc:     kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] net: dsa: microchip: Fix PHY loopback
 configuration for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873

Hi,

On Tue, 2023-11-21 at 16:24 +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> Correct the PHY loopback bit handling in the ksz8_w_phy_bmcr and
> ksz8_r_phy_bmcr functions for KSZ8794 and KSZ8873 variants in the ksz8795
> driver. Previously, the code erroneously used Bit 7 of port register 0xD
> for both chip variants, which is actually for LED configuration. This
> update ensures the correct registers and bits are used for the PHY
> loopback feature:
> 
> - For KSZ8794: Use 0xF / Bit 7.
> - For KSZ8873: Use 0xD / Bit 0.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>

This looks like a bugfix, so possibly worth a Fixes tag? Given the
dependency on the previous refactor, I think we can take it via net-
next.

@Andrew, Florian, Vladimir: do you have any specific preference here?

Thanks!

Paolo