netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] sfp: add support for 100 base-x SFPs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d7f934f9b4f45661e41fe7a35a044ea5e8ec1cad.camel@microchip.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:31:36 +0100
From:   Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        UNGLinuxDriver <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] sfp: add support for 100 base-x SFPs

On Mon, 2021-01-11 at 14:22 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin
wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
> know the content is safe
> 
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 02:06:57PM +0100, Bjarni Jonasson wrote:
> > Add support for 100Base-FX, 100Base-LX, 100Base-PX and 100Base-BX10 
> > modules
> > This is needed for Sparx-5 switch.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c | 9 +++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c b/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c
> > index 58014feedf6c..b2a9ee3dd28e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp-bus.c
> > @@ -265,6 +265,12 @@ void sfp_parse_support(struct sfp_bus *bus,
> > const struct sfp_eeprom_id *id,
> >           br_min <= 1300 && br_max >= 1200)
> >               phylink_set(modes, 1000baseX_Full);
> > 
> > +     /* 100Base-FX, 100Base-LX, 100Base-PX, 100Base-BX10 */
> > +     if (id->base.e100_base_fx || id->base.e100_base_lx)
> > +             phylink_set(modes, 100baseFX_Full);
> > +     if ((id->base.e_base_px || id->base.e_base_bx10) && br_nom ==
> > 100)
> > +             phylink_set(modes, 100baseFX_Full);
> 
> Do you have any modules that identify as PX or BX10 modules? What if
> their range of speeds covers 100M - you're only checking the nominal
> speed here.

I have one module that is identified as BX10 (HP-SFP-100FX-J9054C), but
it seems that the PX should also be there according to the standard.

All 100fx modules I've tested had br_min == br_max == br_nom == 100 so
I really don't know what else to use.

> Note that this will likely conflict with changes I submitted over the
> weekend, and it really needs to be done _before_ the comment about
> "If we haven't discovered any modes", not below.

Not sure what you mean, the patch is above the comment (line 265 vs
345).  The patch is on top of 5.10, is that the issue?

> 
> --
> RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
> FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!

Rgds
--
Bjarni Jonasson
Microchip