netdev - Re: [PATCHv4 2/5] net: phy: extend fixed driver with fixed_phy

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: <55E8A0F0.5090702@cogentembedded.com>
Date:	Thu, 3 Sep 2015 22:35:12 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Tawfik Bayouk <tawfik@...vell.com>,
	Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
	Lior Amsalem <alior@...vell.com>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 2/5] net: phy: extend fixed driver with
 fixed_phy_register()

Hello.

On 09/03/2015 10:23 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:

>>> The existing fixed_phy_add() function has several drawbacks that
>>> prevents it from being used as is for OF-based declaration of fixed
>>> PHYs:
>>>
>>>    * The address of the PHY on the fake bus needs to be passed, while a
>>>      dynamic allocation is desired.
>>>
>>>    * Since the phy_device instantiation is post-poned until the next
>>>      mdiobus scan, there is no way to associate the fixed PHY with its
>>>      OF node, which later prevents of_phy_connect() from finding this
>>>      fixed PHY from a given OF node.
>>>
>>> To solve this, this commit introduces fixed_phy_register(), which will
>>> allocate an available PHY address, add the PHY using fixed_phy_add()
>>> and instantiate the phy_device structure associated with the provided
>>> OF node.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
>>> Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
>>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/net/phy/fixed.c   | 61
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    include/linux/phy_fixed.h | 11 +++++++++
>>>    2 files changed, 72 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c b/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
>>> index e41546d..d60d875 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
>> [...]
>>> @@ -203,6 +204,66 @@ err_regs:
>> [...]
>>> +int fixed_phy_register(unsigned int irq,
>>> +               struct fixed_phy_status *status,
>>> +               struct device_node *np)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct fixed_mdio_bus *fmb = &platform_fmb;
>>> +    struct phy_device *phy;
>>> +    int phy_addr;
>>> +    int ret;
>>> +
>>> +    /* Get the next available PHY address, up to PHY_MAX_ADDR */
>>> +    spin_lock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
>>> +    if (phy_fixed_addr == PHY_MAX_ADDR) {
>>> +        spin_unlock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
>>> +        return -ENOSPC;
>>> +    }
>>> +    phy_addr = phy_fixed_addr++;
>>> +    spin_unlock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
>>> +
>>> +    ret = fixed_phy_add(PHY_POLL, phy_addr, status);
>>
>>     Was rummaging in the fixed_phy driver and a bug sprang right at me:
>> 'phy' should have been passed here, not PHY_POLL. Luckily, all callers
>> pass PHY_POLL anyway...

> Are we looking at the same header file for the prototype of fixed_phy_add()?

    Probably not. I was looking at Linus' tree, yours is probably net-next. :-)

> extern int fixed_phy_add(unsigned int irq, int phy_id,
>                           struct fixed_phy_status *status,
>                           int link_gpio);

> First argument is correct here..

    No, fixed_phy_register() gets 'irq' passed to it and it should in its turn 
call fixed_phy_add() with this argument, not PHY_POLL; otherwise the 'irq' 
parameter gets completely ignored...

> at any rate, if something needs fixing, just go ahead and submit a patch.

    OK.

> --
> Florian

MBR, Sergei

--
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