netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 04/18] net: phy: marvell10g: indicate 88X33x0 only port control registers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 02:22:24 +0200
From:   Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, kuba@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 04/18] net: phy: marvell10g: indicate
 88X33x0 only port control registers

On Wed, 7 Apr 2021 02:10:24 +0200
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:

> > @@ -479,8 +479,8 @@ static int mv3310_config_init(struct phy_device *phydev)
> >  	val = phy_read_mmd(phydev, MDIO_MMD_VEND2, MV_V2_PORT_CTRL);
> >  	if (val < 0)
> >  		return val;
> > -	priv->rate_match = ((val & MV_V2_PORT_CTRL_MACTYPE_MASK) ==
> > -			MV_V2_PORT_CTRL_MACTYPE_RATE_MATCH);
> > +	priv->rate_match = ((val & MV_V2_33X0_PORT_CTRL_MACTYPE_MASK) ==
> > +			MV_V2_33X0_PORT_CTRL_MACTYPE_RATE_MATCH);
> >  
> >  	/* Enable EDPD mode - saving 600mW */
> >  	return mv3310_set_edpd(phydev, ETHTOOL_PHY_EDPD_DFLT_TX_MSECS);
> > --   
> 
> So it appears that mv3310_config_init() should not be used with the
> mv88x2110. Did i miss somewhere where mv3310_drivers was changed so it
> actually does not use it?
> 
> 	 Andrew

This patch series makes it later so that mv3310_config_init() correctly
initializes even 2210 (this is done in patch 07/18). The function then
calls chip->get_mactype() and chip->init_interface() methods, which are
different for 3310 than for 2110.

I am thinking about whether all the functions which are same for all
the chips should be renamed from
  mv3310_*
to
  mv10g_*

This would rename
  mv3310_config_init
to
  mv10g_config_init
which would be more correct.

What do you think?

Marek