netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: phy: Add Wake-on-LAN driver for Microsemi PHYs.

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: <20161004141250.GA29274@microsemi.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Oct 2016 19:42:51 +0530
From:   Raju Lakkaraju <Raju.Lakkaraju@...rosemi.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        <Allan.Nielsen@...rosemi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: phy: Add Wake-on-LAN driver for
 Microsemi PHYs.

Hi Andrew,

Thank you for code review and valuable comments.

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 06:27:05PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL
> 
> 
> > +#define MSCC_PHY_WOL_MAC_CONTROL       27
> > +#define EDGE_RATE_CNTL_POS             5
> > +#define EDGE_RATE_CNTL_MASK            0x00E0
> 
> This patch does not require these two #defines.
> 
> Please indicate in the cover note if the patches depends on other
> patches in order to cleanly apply. Or if these patches are going to
> conflict with some other patches.
> 

Accepted. I will remove those 2 defines.

> > +     reg_val = phy_read(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_MAC_CONTROL);
> > +     if (wol_conf->wolopts & WAKE_MAGICSECURE)
> > +             reg_val |= SECURE_ON_ENABLE;
> > +     else
> > +             reg_val &= ~SECURE_ON_ENABLE;
> > +     phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_MAC_CONTROL, reg_val);
> > +
> > +     if (wol_conf->wolopts & WAKE_MAGICSECURE) {
> > +             reg_val = wol_conf->sopass[4] << 8;
> > +             reg_val |= wol_conf->sopass[5];
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_LOWER_PASSWD, reg_val);
> > +             reg_val = wol_conf->sopass[2] << 8;
> > +             reg_val |= wol_conf->sopass[3];
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_MID_PASSWD, reg_val);
> > +             reg_val = wol_conf->sopass[0] << 8;
> > +             reg_val |= wol_conf->sopass[1];
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_UPPER_PASSWD, reg_val);
> > +     } else {
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_LOWER_PASSWD, 0);
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_MID_PASSWD, 0);
> > +             phy_write(phydev, MSCC_PHY_WOL_UPPER_PASSWD, 0);
> > +     }
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to set the password, and then enable the
> password feature?
> 

Accepted. I will change.

> I don't know much about WOL. Hopefully Florian will add further
> comments.
> 
>          Andrew

---
Thanks,
Raju.