netdev - reset value of MV88E6XXX_G1_IEEE

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4e5592a2-bce3-127b-99e1-7fab00dc0511@prevas.dk>
Date:   Mon, 27 May 2019 09:36:13 +0000
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: reset value of MV88E6XXX_G1_IEEE_PRI

Hi,

Looking through the data sheets comparing the mv88e6240 and 6250, I
noticed that they have the exact same description of the G1_IEEE_PRI
register (global1, offset 0x18). However, the current code used by 6240 does

int mv88e6085_g1_ieee_pri_map(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip)
{
	/* Reset the IEEE Tag priorities to defaults */
	return mv88e6xxx_g1_write(chip, MV88E6XXX_G1_IEEE_PRI, 0xfa41);
}

while if my reading of the data sheet is correct, the reset value is
really 0xfa50 (fields 7:6 and 5:4 are RWS to 0x1, field 3:2 and 1:0 are
RWR) - and this is also the value I read from the 6250 on our old BSP
with an out-of-tree driver that doesn't touch that register. This seems
to go way back (at least 3b1588593097). Should this be left alone for
not risking breaking existing setups (just updating the comment), or can
we make the code match the comment? Or am I just reading this all wrong?

Rasmus