netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] net: phy: add Maxlinear GPY115/21x/24x driver

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:   Sat, 5 Jun 2021 03:32:39 +0000
From:   Liang Xu <lxu@...linear.com>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
CC:     "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hmehrtens@...linear.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Mohren <tmohren@...linear.com>,
        "vee.khee.wong@...ux.intel.com" <vee.khee.wong@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: phy: add Maxlinear GPY115/21x/24x driver

On 5/6/2021 3:44 am, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> This email was sent from outside of MaxLinear.
>
>
> Hello,
>
>> Add driver to support the Maxlinear GPY115, GPY211, GPY212, GPY215,
>> GPY241, GPY245 PHYs.
> to me this seems like an evolution of the Lantiq XWAY PHYs for which
> we already have a driver: intel-xway.c.
> Intel took over Lantiq some years ago and last year MaxLinear then
> took over what was formerly Lantiq from Intel.
>
>  From what I can tell right away: the interrupt handling still seems
> to be the same. Also the GPHY firmware version register also was there
> on older SoCs (with two or more GPHYs embedded into the SoC). SGMII
> support is new. And I am not sure about Wake-on-LAN.
>
> Have you considered adding support for these new PHYs to intel-xway.c?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Martin
>
I'm thinking to separate them.

They are based on different IP and have many differences.

The XWAY PHYs are going to EoL (or maybe already EoL).

It creates difficulty for the test coverage to put together.