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  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:   Wed, 27 May 2020 07:13:33 -0500
From:   Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <robh@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/4] net: phy: Add a helper to return the
 index for of the internal delay

Andrew

On 5/26/20 7:42 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> +/**
>> + * phy_get_delay_index - returns the index of the internal delay
>> + * @phydev: phy_device struct
>> + * @delay_values: array of delays the PHY supports
>> + * @size: the size of the delay array
>> + * @int_delay: the internal delay to be looked up
>> + * @descending: if the delay array is in descending order
>> + *
>> + * Returns the index within the array of internal delay passed in.
>> + * Return errno if the delay is invalid or cannot be found.
>> + */
>> +s32 phy_get_delay_index(struct phy_device *phydev, int *delay_values, int size,
>> +			int int_delay, bool descending)
>> +{
>> +	if (int_delay < 0)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	if (size <= 0)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> +	if (descending)
>> +		return phy_find_descending_delay(phydev, delay_values, size,
>> +						 int_delay);
>> +
>> +	return phy_find_ascending_delay(phydev, delay_values, size, int_delay);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(phy_get_delay_index);
> Do we really need this ascending vs descending? This array is not
> coming from device tree of anything, it is a static list in the PHY
> driver. I would just define it needs to be ascending and be done.

I was thinking about the constraints of having just an ascending array 
helper.

If there is a PHY out there that has a descending delay array then this 
function is not a helper.

Then the PHY driver now has to implement a descending search or extend 
out this helper to do the same.

I can just keep it ascending for now but this helper may need to be 
updated in the future to accommodate any PHYs with descending delay arrays.

Dan


> 	Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists