netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] enetc: Introduce basic PF and VF ENETC ethernet drivers

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: <20181115203544.GG32274@lunn.ch>
Date:   Thu, 15 Nov 2018 21:35:44 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alexandru.marginean@....com,
        catalin.horghidan@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] enetc: Introduce basic PF and VF ENETC
 ethernet drivers

On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 06:13:53PM +0200, Claudiu Manoil wrote:
> ENETC is a multi-port virtualized Ethernet controller supporting GbE
> designs

Hi Claudiu

Do you mean 1GbE, or multigigabit? Do you have a SERDES between the
MAC and the PHY? Could an SFP be connected?

> +static int enetc_of_get_phy(struct enetc_ndev_priv *priv)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *np = priv->dev->of_node;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	if (!np) {
> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "missing ENETC port node\n");
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	priv->phy_node = of_parse_phandle(np, "phy-handle", 0);
> +	if (!priv->phy_node) {
> +		if (!of_phy_is_fixed_link(np)) {
> +			dev_err(priv->dev, "PHY not specified\n");
> +			return -ENODEV;
> +		}
> +
> +		err = of_phy_register_fixed_link(np);
> +		if (err < 0) {
> +			dev_err(priv->dev, "fixed link registration failed\n");
> +			return err;
> +		}
> +
> +		priv->phy_node = of_node_get(np);
> +	}
> +
> +	priv->if_mode = of_get_phy_mode(np);
> +	if (priv->if_mode < 0) {
> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "missing phy type\n");
> +		of_node_put(priv->phy_node);
> +		if (of_phy_is_fixed_link(np))
> +			of_phy_deregister_fixed_link(np);
> +
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

I asked the above questions because of this. Using phylink will
simplify a lot of this. And it makes you future proof for faster
speeds and handling the SERDES between the MAC and the PHY, and having
an SFP, etc.

       Andrew