netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] Convert Ocelot and Felix switches to PHYLINK

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:   Thu, 21 Nov 2019 01:18:55 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Joergen Andreasen <joergen.andreasen@...rochip.com>,
        "Allan W. Nielsen" <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Alexandru Marginean <alexandru.marginean@....com>,
        Xiaoliang Yang <xiaoliang.yang_1@....com>,
        "Y.b. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] Convert Ocelot and Felix switches to PHYLINK

> Not really, at that point it was OK to have interface
> PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA. There were few more checks before creating the
> network device. Now with your changes you were creating
> a network device for each port of the soc even if some ports
> were not used on a board.

That does not sound right. If the port is not used, the DSA core will
call port_disable() to allow the driver to power off the port. It will
not create a network device for it.

Or is this just an issue with the switchdev driver, not the DSA
driver?

	Andrew
> > >                 serdes = devm_of_phy_get(ocelot->dev, portnp, NULL);
> > > -               if (IS_ERR(serdes)) {
> > > -                       err = PTR_ERR(serdes);
> > > -                       if (err == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > > -                               dev_dbg(ocelot->dev, "deferring probe\n");
> > 
> > Why did you remove the probe deferral for the serdes phy?
> Because not all the ports have the "phys" property.

You probably need to differentiate between ENODEV and EPROBE_DEFER.
You definitely do need to return EPROBE_DEFER if you get that.  Shame
you cannot use devm_phy_optional_get().

    Andrew