netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 3/3] net: phy: allow EEE with SGMII interface modes

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: <3bcc3380-6e59-06e3-9ebd-5450e89c90a2@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:42:57 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 3/3] net: phy: allow EEE with SGMII interface modes

On 03/27/2017 01:15 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> Here's the revised patch as requested.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 8<===
> From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
> Subject: [PATCH] net: phy: allow EEE with any interface mode
> 
> EEE is able to work in any PHY interface mode, there is nothing which
> fundamentally restricts it to only a few modes.  For example, EEE works
> in SGMII mode with the Marvell 88E1512.
> 
> Rather than just adding SGMII mode to the list, Florian suggests
> removing the list of interface modes entirely:
> 
>   It actually sounds like we should just kill the check entirely,
>   it does not appear that any of the interface mode would not
>   fundamentally be able to support EEE, because the "lowest" mode
>   we support is MII, and even there it's quite possible to support
>   EEE.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>

Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>

I think David will require you to resubmit this as an entire patch
series and without an RFC tag. Do you want to hold off a bit to get
build coverage or go ahead and target net-next right away?

Thanks!
-- 
Florian