netdev - Re: [PATCH V3] net: phy: tja11xx: Add TJA11xx PHY driver

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:   Sun, 23 Dec 2018 10:16:29 +0100
From:   Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] net: phy: tja11xx: Add TJA11xx PHY driver

On 12/22/18 6:39 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 22.12.2018 00:35, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Add driver for the NXP TJA1100 and TJA1101 PHYs. These PHYs are special
>> BroadRReach 100BaseT1 PHYs used in automotive.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
>> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
>> Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
>> Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
>> ---
>> V2: - Use phy_modify(), phy_{set,clear}_bits()
>>     - Drop enable argument of tja11xx_enable_link_control()
>>     - Use PHY_BASIC_T1_FEATURES and dont modify supported/advertised
>>       features in config_init callback
>>     - Use genphy_soft_reset() instead of opencoding the reset sequence.
>>     - Drop the aneg parts, since the PHY datasheet claims it does not
>>       support aneg
>> V3: - Replace clr with mask
>>     - Add hwmon support
>>     - Check commstat in tja11xx_read_status() only if link is up
>>     - Use PHY_ID_MATCH_MODEL()
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/phy/Kconfig       |   6 +
>>  drivers/net/phy/Makefile      |   1 +
>>  drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c | 424 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  3 files changed, 431 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 drivers/net/phy/nxp-tja11xx.c
>>
> [...]
>> +
>> +struct tja11xx_phy_stats {
>> +	const char	*string;
>> +	u8		reg;
>> +	u8		off;
>> +	u16		mask;
>> +};
>> +
> As written in my other mail, you could think of using
> FIELD_GET() again. Things like
> ... n, BIT(n), 
> ... m, BIT(m), 
> are simply redundant.

Done

>> +static struct tja11xx_phy_stats tja11xx_hw_stats[] = {
>> +	{ "phy_symbol_error_count", 20, 0, 0xffff },
>> +	{ "phy_polarity_detect", 25, 6, BIT(6) },
>> +	{ "phy_open_detect", 25, 7, BIT(7) },
>> +	{ "phy_short_detect", 25, 8, BIT(8) },
>> +	{ "phy_rem_rcvr_count", 26, 0, 0xff },
>> +	{ "phy_loc_rcvr_count", 26, 8, 0xff },
> 
> Shouldn't mask in the last line be 0xff00 ?
> In the relevant code you do: val = (reg & mask) >> off

Yes, fixed, thanks

>> +static int tja11xx_probe(struct phy_device *phydev)
>> +{
>> +	struct device *dev = &phydev->mdio.dev;
>> +	struct tja11xx_priv *priv;
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	priv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!priv)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	priv->hwmon_name = devm_kstrdup(dev, dev_name(dev), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!priv->hwmon_name)
>> +		return -ENODEV;
> 
> Do you really need to make a copy of the device name?
> Why not simply priv->hwmon_name = dev_name(dev) ?

Fine by me, but then maybe I don't quite understand why the other
drivers duplicate the name, eg. the sfp.c one.

> And if devm_kstrdup fails, then most likely you have an out-of-memory
> error, so why not return -ENOMEM as usual?

Fixed

>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; priv->hwmon_name[i]; i++)
>> +		if (hwmon_is_bad_char(priv->hwmon_name[i]))
>> +			priv->hwmon_name[i] = '_';
>> +
>> +	priv->hwmon_dev =
>> +		devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(dev, priv->hwmon_name,
>> +						     phydev,
>> +						     &tja11xx_hwmon_chip_info,
>> +						     NULL);
>> +
> Prerequisite for this call is that HWMON is configured in the kernel and
> it's reachable. Something like "IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_HWMON)" would be
> needed. You can see driver rtc-ds1307 for an example.

The driver depends on HWMON, so that should be sufficient ?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut