linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: phy: tja11xx: replace "nxp,rmii-refclk-in" with "nxp,reverse-mode"

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: <20240815133707.GC632411@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 14:37:07 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
	conor+dt@...nel.org, andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com,
	hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
	andrei.botila@....nxp.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: phy: tja11xx: replace
 "nxp,rmii-refclk-in" with "nxp,reverse-mode"

On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 01:51:25PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
> As the new property "nxp,reverse-mode" is added to instead of the
> "nxp,rmii-refclk-in" property, so replace the "nxp,rmii-refclk-in"
> property used in the driver with the "nxp,reverse-mode" property
> and make slight modifications.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c | 13 ++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c b/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
> index 2c263ae44b4f..a3721f91689b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
> @@ -78,8 +78,7 @@
>  #define MII_COMMCFG			27
>  #define MII_COMMCFG_AUTO_OP		BIT(15)
>  
> -/* Configure REF_CLK as input in RMII mode */
> -#define TJA110X_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN       BIT(0)
> +#define TJA11XX_REVERSE_MODE		BIT(0)
>  
>  struct tja11xx_priv {
>  	char		*hwmon_name;
> @@ -274,10 +273,10 @@ static int tja11xx_get_interface_mode(struct phy_device *phydev)
>  		mii_mode = MII_CFG1_REVMII_MODE;
>  		break;
>  	case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII:
> -		if (priv->flags & TJA110X_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN)
> -			mii_mode = MII_CFG1_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN;
> -		else
> +		if (priv->flags & TJA11XX_REVERSE_MODE)
>  			mii_mode = MII_CFG1_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_OUT;
> +		else
> +			mii_mode = MII_CFG1_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN;
>  		break;
>  	default:
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -517,8 +516,8 @@ static int tja11xx_parse_dt(struct phy_device *phydev)
>  	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_MDIO))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (of_property_read_bool(node, "nxp,rmii-refclk-in"))
> -		priv->flags |= TJA110X_RMII_MODE_REFCLK_IN;

Hi,

I am curious to know if there are any backwards compatibility
issues to be considered in making this change.

> +	if (of_property_read_bool(node, "nxp,reverse-mode"))
> +		priv->flags |= TJA11XX_REVERSE_MODE;
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
>