linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: b53: Enable internal GPHY on BCM63268

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250207164400.x2fobtcblr7g3dil@skbuf>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 18:44:00 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Kyle Hendry <kylehendrydev@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: b53: Enable internal GPHY on BCM63268

On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 05:41:19PM -0800, Kyle Hendry wrote:
> On 2025-02-06 12:17, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 10:15:50AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > Hi Kyle,
> > > 
> > > On 2/5/25 20:30, Kyle Hendry wrote:
> > > > Some BCM63268 bootloaders do not enable the internal PHYs by default.
> > > > This patch series adds functionality for the switch driver to
> > > > configure the gigabit ethernet PHY.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Kyle Hendry <kylehendrydev@...il.com>
> > > So the register address you are manipulating logically belongs in the GPIO
> > > block (GPIO_GPHY_CTRL) which has become quite a bit of a sundry here. I
> > > don't have a strong objection about the approach picked up here but we will
> > > need a Device Tree binding update describing the second (and optional)
> > > register range.
> > Despite this being internal, is this actually a GPIO? Should it be
> > modelled as a GPIO line connected to a reset input on the PHY? It
> > would then nicely fit in the existing phylib handling of a PHY with a
> > GPIO reset line?
> > 
> > 	Andrew
> The main reason I took this approach is because a SF2 register has
> similar bits and I wanted to be consistent with that driver. If it
> makes more sense to treat these bits as GPIOs/clocks/resets then it
> would make the implementation simpler.

This has not always been clear, but we prefer handling components
unrelated to Ethernet switching outside of DSA, if at all possible.