linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v5 2/9] net: phy: add support for scanning PHY in PHY packages nodes

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]

Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 02:02:41 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 2/9] net: phy: add support for scanning PHY
 in PHY packages nodes

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 06:20:10PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote:
> > Quoting Christian Marangi (2024-02-01 16:17:28)
> > > 
> > > +static int __of_mdiobus_parse_phys(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *np,
> > > +                                  int base_addr, bool *scanphys)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct device_node *child;
> > > +       int addr, rc = 0;
> > > +
> > > +       /* Loop over the child nodes and register a phy_device for each phy */
> > > +       for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child) {
> > > +               if (of_node_name_eq(child, "ethernet-phy-package")) {
> > > +                       rc = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &addr);
> > > +                       if (rc)
> > > +                               goto exit;
> > 
> > This means a PHY package node w/o a reg property will prevent all other
> > PHYs in the same parent node to be found?
> >
> 
> Since this is something new, would it be a problem to make it mandatory
> to define a reg? (And return error if we find something? Or print a
> warn?)

Making reg mandatory within a package is reasonable. Please indicate
this in the DT schema.

     Andrew