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:   Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:28:56 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc:     Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Steve McIntyre <steve@...val.com>,
        Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
        "open list:BPF JIT for MIPS (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" 
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Willy Liu <willy.liu@...ltek.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: realtek PHY commit bbc4d71d63549 causes regression

On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 03:16:36PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 17:45, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > However, that leaves the question why bbc4d71d63549bcd was backported,
> > > although I understand why the discussion is a bit trickier there. But
> > > if it did not fix a regression, only broken code that never worked in
> > > the first place, I am not convinced it belongs in -stable.
> >
> > Please ask Serge Semin what platform he tested on. I kind of expect it
> > worked for him, in some limited way, enough that it passed his
> > testing.
> >
> 
> I'll make a note here that a rather large number of platforms got
> broken by the same fix for the Realtek PHY driver:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/?q=bbc4d71d6354
> 
> I seriously doubt whether disabling TX/RX delay when it is enabled by
> h/w straps is the right thing to do here.

The device tree is explicitly asking for rgmii. If it wanted the
hardware left alone, it should of used PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA.

But we might be able to compromise for a cycle or two. As far as i
understand the hardware, we can read the strapping. If we find the
strapping resisters are present, but rgmii is in DT, print a warning
that the device tree needs upgrading, and ignore the DT mode. We can
add this to stable, but not net-next.

    Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists