netdev - Re: PHY reset may still be asserted during MDIO probe

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:   Fri, 9 Jul 2021 16:54:44 +0100
From:   "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PHY reset may still be asserted during MDIO probe

On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 05:33:36PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm investigating a network failure after kexec on the Renesas Koelsch
> and Salvator-XS development boards, using the sh-eth or ravb driver.

Personally, I've never liked the reset support at PHY device level due
to problems like the one you've identified here. I've tended to use the
bus-level reset in preference to the PHY-level reset, particularly
because when you have multiple PHYs on the bus all sharing a common
reset, it seems to be the most sensible approach - and I see a single
PHY as no different from multiple PHYs on the bus.

However, I can see the argument for using the PHY level, but as you
note, that can create chicken and egg issues. I'm not entirely sure
why we decide to hold a PHY in reset when we've found it but not
started to make use of it - we don't do that with other devices in
the system. Why are PHYs special?

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