netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] DT: phy.txt: Clarify expected compatible values

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: <CAOesGMipfjA9nO8Oe5J_672Xz7nKmR4UAPnoYCBzcZKDiQDFZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:32:27 -0800
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] DT: phy.txt: Clarify expected compatible values

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 08:41:56AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>> > PHY devices may only list clause 22, 45, and their PHY identifier
>> > values as compatible values. No other compatible strings are allowed.
>> > Make this clear in the documentation, and remove examples where
>> > make/model compatible strings are listed.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
>>
>> I'm not sure I agree with the disallowing here. It's common practice
>> to use a specific compatible to describe the actual hardware used, in
>> case it's needed in the future for some driver to distinguish
>> behavior, etc.
>>
>> So while it should be required to include the clause compats, having a
>> more specific one in there should be acceptable.
>
> Hi Olof
>
> Matching PHY devices to drivers has never used to compatible string,
> other than the "ethernet-phy-XXXX.YYYY" string.  The PHY has two
> registers containing a manufacture id, device id and revision,
> registers 2 and 3. These are the XXXX and YYYY. The core code reads
> these values, or uses the values from the ethernet-phy-XXXX.YYYY, and
> uses them to find a driver which supports these values.
>
> A make/model string is less specific than ethernet-phy-XXXX.YYYY.
>
> I will reword the changelog to make it clear that
> "ethernet-phy-XXXX.YYYY" is allowed.

Only case I can see the need for a make/model string is if there's a
need to add model-specific properties since you'd need a compatible
then (or make those properties shared between all phy bindings).


Anyway, we've never had a huge issue with this on other probable
busses, so we should be fine with the above. With the clarification
I'm OK with this change.


-Olof