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:   Thu, 28 May 2020 14:56:08 +0100
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux admin <>
To:     Thomas Bogendoerfer <>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: mvpp2: Enable autoneg bypass for
 1000BaseX/2500BaseX ports

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 03:17:33PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Thu, 28 May 2020 14:07:38 +0100
> Russell King - ARM Linux admin <> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 02:11:21PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > > Commit d14e078f23cc ("net: marvell: mvpp2: only reprogram what is necessary
> > >  on mac_config") disabled auto negotiation bypass completely, which breaks
> > > platforms enabling bypass via firmware (not the best option, but it worked).
> > > Since 1000BaseX/2500BaseX ports neither negotiate speed nor duplex mode
> > > we could enable auto negotiation bypass to get back information about link
> > > state.
> > 
> > Thanks, but your commit is missing some useful information.
> > 
> > Which platforms have broken?
> it's an Ambedded MARS-400
> > Can you describe the situation where you require this bit to be set?
> as I have no exact design details I'm just talking about what I can see
> on that platform. It looks like the switch connecting the internal nodes
> doesn't run autoneg on the internal links. So the link to the internal
> nodes will never come up. These links are running 2500BaseX so speed/duplex
> is clean and by enabling bypass I'll get a proper link state, too.
> > We should not be enabling bypass mode as a matter of course, it exists
> > to work around broken setups which do not send the control word.
> if you call it a broken setup I'm fine, but this doesn't solve the problem,
> which exists now. What would be your solution ?

What I was after was additional information about the problem, so
that we can start thinking about how to deal with the AN bypass bit
in a sensible way.

How is the connection between the switch and network interface
described?  I don't think I see a .dts file in mainline for this

RMK's Patch system:
FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 424kbps up

Powered by blists - more mailing lists