netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: improve link partner capability detection

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: <20190405204319.GM23536@lunn.ch>
Date:   Fri, 5 Apr 2019 22:43:19 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: improve link partner capability
 detection

> Right. BMSR_ESTATEN should not be set on a Fast PHY. Handling of this
> case didn't change.
> 
> > A Fast MAC connected to a Giga PHY. The MAC driver will of used
> > phy_set_max_speed() to indicate its limits. In that case, MII_STAT1000
> > does exist and we should report what the peer is advertising.
> > 
> That's what we're doing now with this patch.

Hi Heiner

What i don't get is why we need to do anything based on the MAC. All
we need to do is look at BMSR_ESTATEN, and from that decided if we
should look at MII_STAT1000 or not. When reporting what the peer can
do, we should not care what the local MAC can do.

    Andrew