netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 0/9] Ethernet Cable test support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200430194143.GF107658@lunn.ch>
Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 21:41:43 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, cphealy@...il.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, hkallweit1@...il.com, mkubecek@...e.cz,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 0/9] Ethernet Cable test support

> ECD. The registers looks exactly like the one from the Marvell PHYs,
> which makes me wonder if both have the same building block or if one
> imitated the registers of the other. There are subtle differences
> like one bit in the broadcom PHY is "break link" and is self-clearing,
> while the bit on the Marvell PHY is described as "perform diagnostics
> on link break".

Should we be sharing code between the two drivers?

> What do you mean by calibrate it?

Some of the Marvell documentation talks about calibrating for losses
on the PCB. Run a diagnostics with no cable plugged in, and get the
cable length to the 'fault'. This gives you the distance to the RJ45
socket. You should then subtract that from all subsequent results.
But since this is board design specific, i decided to ignore it. I
suppose it could be stuffed into a DT property, but i got the feeling
it is not worth it, given the measurement granularity of 80cm.

   Andrew