netdev - RE: phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing

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:	Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:52:21 -0700
From:	John Linn <John.Linn@...inx.com>
To:	"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	"devicetree-discuss" <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"netdev" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: glikely@...retlab.ca [mailto:glikely@...retlab.ca] On Behalf Of Grant Likely
> Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 9:44 AM
> To: John Linn; devicetree-discuss; netdev
> Subject: Re: phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing
> 
> (cc'ing devicetree-discuss and netdev mailing lists)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 4:23 PM, John Linn <John.Linn@...inx.com> wrote:
> > Hi Grant,
> >
> > I notice that the OF driver for the mdio bus is not doing auto probing.
> >
> > As we start putting in the phy layer in the emac drivers, the device
> > trees tend to have the phy address in them, but we're not sure we really
> > like that.
> >
> > We really think that being able to let the kernel find the phy address
> > is a big benefit, otherwise this is one other piece of info the user has
> > to know and get right.
> >
> > Am I missing something here?
> 
> No, you're not really missing something, but there is an inherent
> complexity in what you're wanting to do.  Like i2c, MDIO is one of
> those busses that is hard to probe reliable.  Some PHYs respond on
> more than one address, and there is no way to determine which MAC a
> PHY is wired up to.  Many PHYs can live on a single MDIO bus.  MACs
> with their own MDIO busses may still get wired to a PHY on a different
> bus.
> 
> In the simple case where there is a one:one:one relationship between
> MAC, MDIO bus and PHY, then it should be okay to probe the PHY,
> correct?  The question then must be asked; how does the kernel
> determine that it can use the simple case?  Nobody has yet defined a
> way to describe that in the device tree; mostly because nobody has
> needed to yet.
> 
> So, it is possible to do what you want, but you need a way to
> *explicitly* ask for that behaviour.  ie, some way to indicate in a
> MAC node which MDIO bus the phy is on, and that the phy needs to be
> probed for.  I think this should only be an option when the MDIO bus
> has only one PHY.  Come up with a proposal and post it to the
> devicetree-discuss mailing list.

Here's a couple ideas. See what everyone thinks as I'm not stuck on either.

Thanks,
John

1. What if we just don't specific a phy address with a reg property which would specify to auto probe it and find the phy as illustrated below?


		Ethernet_MAC: ethernet@...00000 {
			#address-cells = <1>;
			#size-cells = <1>;
			phy-handle = <&phy0>; 
			mdio {
				#address-cells = <1>;
				#size-cells = <0>;
				phy0: phy@7 {
				} ; 
			} ;

2. Or a special value (-1 or something not 0 - 31) in the phy address that specifies to auto probe as illustrated below.

		Ethernet_MAC: ethernet@...00000 {
			#address-cells = <1>;
			#size-cells = <1>;
			phy-handle = <&phy0>; 
			mdio {
				#address-cells = <1>;
				#size-cells = <0>;
				phy0: phy@7 {
					reg = <-1>;
				} ; 
			} ;

> 
> g.
> 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > John
> >
> >
> > int of_mdiobus_register(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *np)
> > {
> >        struct phy_device *phy;
> >        struct device_node *child;
> >        int rc, i;
> >
> >        /* Mask out all PHYs from auto probing.  Instead the PHYs listed
> > in
> >         * the device tree are populated after the bus has been
> > registered */
> >        mdio->phy_mask = ~0;
> >
> > This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and
> contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under
> applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email
> message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.


This email and any attachments are intended for the sole use of the named recipient(s) and contain(s) confidential information that may be proprietary, privileged or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or forward this email message or any attachments. Delete this email message and any attachments immediately.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html