netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v15 5/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add support for mv88e6393x family of Marvell

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:   Tue, 12 Jan 2021 23:30:48 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, pavana.sharma@...i.com,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        lkp@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net, ashkan.boldaji@...i.com,
        andrew@...n.ch, Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v15 5/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add support for
 mv88e6393x family of Marvell

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:16:32PM +0100, Marek Behún wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 22:38:08 +0200
> Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseT_Full);
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseCR_Full);
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseSR_Full);
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseLR_Full);
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseLRM_Full);
> > > +		phylink_set(mask, 10000baseER_Full);
> > 
> > Why did you remove 1000baseKR_Full from here?
> 
> I am confused now. Should 1000baseKR_Full be here? 10g-kr is 10g-r with
> clause 73 autonegotiation, so they are not compatible, or are they?

ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_10000baseKR_Full_BIT and most of everything else from
enum ethtool_link_mode_bit_indices are network-side media interfaces
(aka between the PHY and the link partner).

Whereas PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_10GKR and most of everything else from
phy_interface_t is a system-side media independent interface (aka
between the MAC and the PHY).

What the 6393X does not support is PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_10GKR, and my
feedback from your previous series did not ask you to remove
1000baseKR_Full from phylink_validate. There's nothing that would
prevent somebody from attaching a PHY with a different (and compatible)
system-side SERDES protocol, and 10GBase-KR on the media side.

What Russell said is that he's seriously thinking about reworking the
phylink_validate API so that the MAC driver would not need to sign off
on things it does not care about (such as what media-side interface will
the PHY use, of which there is an ever increasing plethora). But at the
moment, the API is what it is, and you should put as many media-side
link modes as possible, at the given speed and duplex that the MAC
supports.

_I_ am confused. What did you say you were happy to help with?