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: <7e6fc94d-5da9-b87d-a0d3-3e2ee5ff5961@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Apr 2019 22:51:44 +0200
From:   Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
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

On 05.04.2019 22:43, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> 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.
> 
Do we have a misunderstanding? What you describe is exactly what we're
doing now. BMSR_ESTATEN is read by genphy_read_abilities().
I just don't want to read BMSR whenever genphy_read_status() is called.

>     Andrew
> 
Heiner