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:   Sat, 20 Jun 2020 17:21:42 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <>
To:     Antoine Tenart <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 6/8] net: phy: mscc: timestamping and PHC

> +	/* Retrieve the shared load/save GPIO. Request it as non exclusive as
> +	 * the same GPIO can be requested by all the PHYs of the same package.
> +	 * Ths GPIO must be used with the phc_lock taken (the lock is shared
> +	 * between all PHYs).
> +	 */
> +	vsc8531->load_save = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&phydev->, "load-save",
> +						     GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
> +	if (IS_ERR(vsc8531->load_save)) {
> +		phydev_err(phydev, "Can't get load-save GPIO (%ld)\n",
> +			   PTR_ERR(vsc8531->load_save));
> +		return PTR_ERR(vsc8531->load_save);
> +	}
> +

I can understand the GPIO being optional, it is only needed when PTP
is being used. But i don't see a test anywhere that when PTP is being
used the GPIO is provided. What actually happens if it is missing and
somebody tries to use the PTP? Maybe only register the PTP parts with
the core if the GPIO has been found in DT?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists