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: <4B72FAB2.5000804@freescale.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:28:02 -0600
From:	Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
CC:	John Linn <John.Linn@...inx.com>,
	devicetree-discuss <devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andy Fleming <afleming@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing

Grant Likely wrote:
>> 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.
>>                                phy0: phy@7 {
>>                                        reg = <-1>;
>>                                } ;
> 
> I don't like abusing the reg property in this way.  I wonder if a new
> empty property would be a better way to indicate this.  Maybe
> "phy-probe-address;"?  It would also be important to specify in the
> binding that only one phy node is allowed when phy-probe-address is
> used.
> 
> Also, without a known reg the 'phy@7' name is inaccurate.  Drop the @7.
> 
> Scott, Andy: any thoughts?

I'm not fond of the -1.  I'd prefer the explicit phy-probe-address property, 
though I don't mind too much using the absence of reg.

-Scott
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ