netdev - Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 2/5] net: Introduce a new MII time stamping interface.

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: <20181007191551.gy4l4g6qdgz6ztez@localhost>
Date:   Sun, 7 Oct 2018 12:15:51 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 2/5] net: Introduce a new MII time stamping
 interface.

On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 08:27:51PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> The mii_timestamper is generic, in the same why hwmon is generic. It
> does not matter where the time stamper is. So i'm wondering if we
> should remove the special case for a PHY timestamper, remove all the
> phylib support, etc.

This implementation is (to the best of my understanding) what you were
asking for in your review of v1:

> So i really think you need to cleanly integrate into phylib and
> phylink.

> Use a phandle, and have
> of_mdiobus_register_phy() follow the phandle to get the device.

> To keep lifecycle issues simple, i would also keep it in phydev, not
> netdev.

This present series is a reasonable, incremental improvement to the
existing PHY time stamping support.  It will handle any use case that
I can think of, and I would like to avoid over-engineering this.

Thanks,
Richard