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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 17:58:43 +0100 From: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@...il.com> To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 照山周一郎 <teruyama@...ingboard-inc.jp> Subject: Re: [PATCH net,stable] phy: sfp: fix high power modules without diag mode On 03/12/2021 13:58, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 11:54:57AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > [...] > Thinking a little more, how about this: > > drivers/net/phy/sfp.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > index 51a1da50c608..4c900d063b19 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > @@ -1752,17 +1752,20 @@ static int sfp_sm_probe_for_phy(struct sfp *sfp) > static int sfp_module_parse_power(struct sfp *sfp) > { > u32 power_mW = 1000; > + bool supports_a2; > > if (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_POWER_DECL)) > power_mW = 1500; > if (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_HIGH_POWER_LEVEL)) > power_mW = 2000; > > + supports_a2 = sfp->id.ext.sff8472_compliance != > + SFP_SFF8472_COMPLIANCE_NONE || > + sfp->id.ext.diagmon & SFP_DIAGMON_DDM; > + > if (power_mW > sfp->max_power_mW) { > /* Module power specification exceeds the allowed maximum. */ > - if (sfp->id.ext.sff8472_compliance == > - SFP_SFF8472_COMPLIANCE_NONE && > - !(sfp->id.ext.diagmon & SFP_DIAGMON_DDM)) { > + if (!supports_a2) { > /* The module appears not to implement bus address > * 0xa2, so assume that the module powers up in the > * indicated mode. > @@ -1779,11 +1782,24 @@ static int sfp_module_parse_power(struct sfp *sfp) > } > } > > + if (power_mW <= 1000) { > + /* Modules below 1W do not require a power change sequence */ > + return 0; > + } > + > + if (!supports_a2) { > + /* The module power level is below the host maximum and the > + * module appears not to implement bus address 0xa2, so assume > + * that the module powers up in the indicated mode. > + */ > + return 0; > + } > + > /* If the module requires a higher power mode, but also requires > * an address change sequence, warn the user that the module may > * not be functional. > */ > - if (sfp->id.ext.diagmon & SFP_DIAGMON_ADDRMODE && power_mW > 1000) { > + if (sfp->id.ext.diagmon & SFP_DIAGMON_ADDRMODE) { > dev_warn(sfp->dev, > "Address Change Sequence not supported but module requires %u.%uW, module may not be functional\n", > power_mW / 1000, (power_mW / 100) % 10); > The reporter has problems reaching you. But from what I can tell in his reply to his OpenWrt Github PR: <https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/4802#issuecomment-1013439827> your approach is working perfectly. Could you spin this up as a fully-fledged patch (backports?) Thank you & Cheers, Christian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists