netdev - Re: realtek PHY commit bbc4d71d63549 causes regression

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 linux-cve-announce 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, 29 Oct 2020 16:46:44 +0200
From:   Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        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>,
        "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 Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 03:39:34PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > What about reverting the realtek PHY commit from stable?
> > As Ard said it doesn't really fix anything (usage wise) and causes a bunch of
> > problems.
> > 
> > If I understand correctly we have 3 options:
> > 1. 'Hack' the  drivers in stable to fix it (and most of those hacks will take 
> >    a long time to remove)
> > 2. Update DTE of all affected devices, backport it to stable and force users to
> > update
> > 3. Revert the PHY commit
> > 
> > imho [3] is the least painful solution.
> 
> The PHY commit is correct, in that it fixes a bug. So i don't want to
> remove it.

Yea I meant revert the commit from were ever it was backported, not on current 
upstream. I agree it's correct from a coding point of view, but it never 
actually fixes anything functionality wise of the affected platforms. 
On the contrary, it breaks platforms without warning.

> 
> Backporting it to stable is what is causing most of the issues today,
> combined with a number of broken DT descriptions. So i would be happy
> for stable to get a patch which looks at the strapping, sees ID is
> enabled via strapping, warns the DT blob is FUBAR, and then ignores
> the requested PHY-mode. That gives developers time to fix their broken
> DT.

(Ard replied on this while I was typing)

> 
> 	  Andrew

Cheers
/Ilias