netdev - Re: [RFC] phylink: support for devices with MAC sharing SFP cage & PHY (e.g. Turris Omnia)

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, 30 Dec 2018 10:51:05 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Klaus Kudielka <klaus.kudielka@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
        Tomas Hlavacek <tmshlvck@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] phylink: support for devices with MAC sharing SFP cage &
 PHY (e.g. Turris Omnia)

On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 09:25:53AM +0100, Klaus Kudielka wrote:
> Hello,

Hi Klaus

Thanks for reposting on the correct list.

> Apart from the 88E1514 PHY specified for eth2, the device also
> features an SFP cage, which uses the same SGMII of the Armada
> 385 SoC (a 2:1 multiplexer is driven by the MOD_DEF0 signal).

Some of the Marvell Ethernet switches have a similar setup. Some ports
have both an internal PHY and a SERDES port which can be connected to
an SFP cage. Whichever gets link first is connected to the MAC.  I can
also imagine a slightly different setup to what you have, the MUX is
controlled via a GPIO, not MOD_DEF0, so again, you want both active
until one gets link, although SFP LOS is not very reliable for this.

So we need a generic solution to this. In your case, the PHY should be
configured down when the SFP is present, but then made active when the
SFP is unplugged. For the Marvell switch, we need both SFP and PHY
active until one gets a link, and then the other configured down. So
it sounds like we need some board specific code involved to implement
the board specific parts.

    Andrew