[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <26D9FDECA4FBDD4AADA65D8E2FC68A4A1D32C616@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:59:21 +0000
From: "Bowers, AndrewX" <andrewx.bowers@...el.com>
To: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] ixgbe: use mii_bus to handle MII
related ioctls
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan [mailto:intel-wired-lan-bounces@...osl.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Douthit
> Sent: Monday, December 3, 2018 12:15 PM
> To: Kirsher, Jeffrey T <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>; Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org; intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org; David S. Miller
> <davem@...emloft.net>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] ixgbe: use mii_bus to
> handle MII related ioctls
>
> Use the mii_bus callbacks to address the entire clause 22/45 address space.
> Enables userspace to poke switch registers instead of a single PHY address.
>
> The ixgbe firmware may be polling PHYs in a way that is not protected by the
> mii_bus lock. This isn't new behavior, but as Andrew Lunn pointed out there
> are more addresses available for conflicts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Douthit <stephend@...icom-usa.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
Tested-by: Andrew Bowers <andrewx.bowers@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists