linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement error interrupts unmasking

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: <7aaff08b-a770-4d93-b691-e89b4c40625e@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 20:31:53 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Ramón Nordin Rodriguez <ramon.nordin.rodriguez@...roamp.se>
Cc: Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com, Pier.Beruto@...emi.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, saeedm@...dia.com,
	anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com,
	ruanjinjie@...wei.com, Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com,
	vladimir.oltean@....com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
	Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com, Selvamani.Rajagopal@...emi.com,
	Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com, benjamin.bigler@...nformulastudent.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement error
 interrupts unmasking

> After a considerable ammount of headscratching it seems that disabling collision
> detection on the macphy is the only way of getting it stable.
> When PLCA is enabled it's expected that CD causes problems, when running
> in CSMA/CD mode it was unexpected (for me at least).

Now we are back to, why is your system different? What is triggering a
collision for you, but not Parthiban?

There is nothing in the standard about reporting a collision. So this
is a Microchip extension? So the framework is not doing anything when
it happens, which will explain why it becomes a storm.... Until we do
have a mechanism to handle vendor specific interrupts, the frame work
should disable them all, to avoid this storm.

Does the datasheet document what to do on a collision? How are you
supposed to clear the condition?

       Andrew