linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v1] lan78xx: Enable 125 MHz CLK and Auto Speed configuration for LAN7801 if NO EEPROM is detected

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 14:39:23 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Rengarajan.S@...rochip.com
Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
	UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, kuba@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1] lan78xx: Enable 125 MHz CLK and Auto Speed
 configuration for LAN7801 if NO EEPROM is detected

On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 06:59:03AM +0000, Rengarajan.S@...rochip.com wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> 
> Apologies for the delay in response. Thanks for reviewing the patch.
> Please find my comments inline.
> 
> On Sat, 2024-05-04 at 09:49 +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> > know the content is safe
> > 
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 10:25:03AM +0530, Rengarajan S wrote:
> > > The 125MHz and 25MHz clock configurations are done in the
> > > initialization
> > > regardless of EEPROM (125MHz is needed for RGMII 1000Mbps
> > > operation). After
> > > a lite reset (lan78xx_reset), these contents go back to
> > > defaults(all 0, so
> > > no 125MHz or 25MHz clock and no ASD/ADD). Also, after the lite
> > > reset, the
> > > LAN7800 enables the ASD/ADD in the absence of EEPROM. There is no
> > > such
> > > check for LAN7801.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Rengarajan S <rengarajan.s@...rochip.com>
> > 
> > Hi Rengarajan,
> > 
> > This patch seems address two issues.
> > So I think it would be best to split it into two patches.
> 
> Sure. Will split the patch into two and will submit the updated patch
> in the next revision shortly,
> 
> > 
> > Also, are these problems bugs - do they have adverse effect visible
> > by
> > users? If so perhaps they should be targeted at 'net' rather than
> > 'net-next', and an appropriate Fixes tag should appear just above
> > the Signed-off-by line (no blank line in between).
> 
> The changes listed in the patch are feature additions where we give an
> option of configuring the clock and speed in the absence of the EEPROM.
> The current code does not have any bugs related to this. Since, these
> are the additional features/requirements, we are targeting at 'net-
> next' rather than 'net'.

Thanks, I agree net-next is appropriate for such changes.