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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:42:59 -0700
From:   Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethtool: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add pretty dump for 88E6352 SERDES

On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 2:16 PM Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:55:26AM -0700, Chris Healy wrote:
> > From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> >
> > In addition to the port registers, the device can provide the
> > SERDES/PCS registers. Dump these, and for a few of the important
> > SGMII/1000Base-X registers decode the bits.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
> > ---
> [...]
> > +     case 32 + 0:
> > +             REG(reg - 32, "Fiber Control", val);
>
> Could you give these "32" (and similar below) a name?

Yep, will do in v2.
>
> [...]
> > @@ -667,6 +850,17 @@ static int dsa_mv88e6xxx_dump_regs(struct ethtool_regs *regs)
> >               else
> >                       REG(i, "", data[i]);
> >
> > +     /* Dump the SERDES registers, if provided */
> > +     if (regs->len > 32 * 2) {
>
> sizeof(u16) would be easier to read, IMHO

Agreed, will do in v2.
>
> > +             printf("\n%s Switch Port SERDES Registers\n", sw->name);
> > +             printf("-------------------------------------\n");
> > +             for (i = 32; i < regs->len / 2; i++)
> > +                     if (sw->dump)
> > +                             sw->dump(i, data[i]);
> > +                     else
> > +                             REG(i, "", data[i]);
>
> In the dump handler above you subtract 32 (offset of SERDES registers,
> IIUC) from register number but in the generic branch you don't, this
> seems inconsistent.

You are correct.  I tested this code path and it was reporting
incorrectly.  Fix coming in v2.

>
> Michal
>
> > +     }
> > +
> >       return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > --
> > 2.21.3
> >

Powered by blists - more mailing lists