netdev - Re: etsec2 attached to sgmii 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]

Date:   Wed, 4 Oct 2017 16:19:23 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jörg Willmann <joe@...t.de>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: etsec2 attached to sgmii phy

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Andrew Lunn wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 07:56:53AM +0200, Jörg Willmann wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> we use a QorIQ P1011 connected via SGMII to a switch (Marvell 88E6352).
>> Currently we still use a really old linux kernel (2.6.33) successfully.
>>
>> For configuration of the MDIO Bus attached to the corresponding eTSEC/TBI
>> Phy we use the following settings in the device tree:
>>
>>                         mdio@...00 {
>>                                    #address-cells = <0x1>;
>>                                    #size-cells = <0x0>;
>>                                    compatible = "fsl,etsec2-tbi";
>>                                    reg = <0x25000 0x1000 0xb1030 0x4>;
>
> Hi Joerg
>
> Is 0xb1030 0x4 fixed by the silicon? Can it be expressed as an offset from
> 0x25000?
>
> It seems like the idea behind the patch is to hard code some
> things. If you can hard code the offset into get_etsec_tbipa(), i
> think that would be an O.K. solution to your problem.
>
>      Andrew
>
Yes, the adress 0xb1030 is fixed but it's something totally different than 
the address range of 0x25000. 0xb0000, 0xb1000 and 0xb2000 are base 
addresses of the eTSEC MAC (TPIPA is a register within the MAC) and 
0x24000, 0x25000 and 0x26000 are the base registers of the corresponding 
MDIO controllers. So I wouldn't add a dependency between these two things.
>From my point of view, the implementation in the old kernel where 
get_gfar_tbipa() got the device tree node pointer as argument was not soo 
bad ;-)

 	Joerg