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, 3 Dec 2021 12:03:25 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>,
        Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 05/12] net: dsa: bcm_sf2: convert to
 phylink_generic_validate()

On 11/24/21 9:52 AM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> Populate the supported interfaces and MAC capabilities for the bcm_sf2
> DSA switch and remove the old validate implementation to allow DSA to
> use phylink_generic_validate() for this switch driver.
> 
> The exclusion of Gigabit linkmodes for MII and Reverse MII links is
> handled within phylink_generic_validate() in phylink, so there is no
> need to make them conditional on the interface mode in the driver.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>

Tested-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>

but it looks like the fixed link ports are reporting some pretty strange
advertisement values one of my two platforms running the same kernel image:

# ethtool rgmii_2
Settings for rgmii_2:
        Supported ports: [ MII ]
        Supported link modes:   1000baseKX/Full
        Supported pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
        Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
        Supported FEC modes: Not reported
        Advertised link modes:  1000baseKX/Full
        Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
        Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
        Advertised FEC modes: Not reported
        Link partner advertised link modes:  1000baseKX/Full
        Link partner advertised pause frame use: No
        Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: No
        Link partner advertised FEC modes: Not reported
        Speed: 1000Mb/s
        Duplex: Full
        Auto-negotiation: on
        Port: MII
        PHYAD: 0
        Transceiver: internal
        Supports Wake-on: gsf
        Wake-on: d
        SecureOn password: 00:00:00:00:00:00
        Link detected: yes
#

These should be 1000BaseT/Full since these are RGMII fixed links:

# ethtool rgmii_2
Settings for rgmii_2:
        Supported ports: [ MII ]
        Supported link modes:   1000baseT/Full
        Supported pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
        Supports auto-negotiation: Yes
        Supported FEC modes: Not reported
        Advertised link modes:  1000baseT/Full
        Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only
        Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
        Advertised FEC modes: Not reported
        Link partner advertised link modes:  1000baseT/Full
        Link partner advertised pause frame use: No
        Link partner advertised auto-negotiation: No
        Link partner advertised FEC modes: Not reported
        Speed: 1000Mb/s
        Duplex: Full
        Auto-negotiation: on
        Port: MII
        PHYAD: 0
        Transceiver: internal
        Supports Wake-on: gsf
        Wake-on: d
        SecureOn password: 00:00:00:00:00:00
        Link detected: yes
#

There is no problem with Linus' master branch at
net-5.16-rc4-173-ga51e3ac43ddb, let me see if I can bisect this and/or
fix it in the next days.

Thanks!
-- 
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ