netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: mdio: mscc-miim: replace magic numbers for the bus reset

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 13 Mar 2022 02:17:55 +0100
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: mdio: mscc-miim: replace magic numbers
 for the bus reset

Am 2022-03-13 01:51, schrieb Andrew Lunn:
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/mdio/mdio-mscc-miim.c 
>> b/drivers/net/mdio/mdio-mscc-miim.c
>> index 64fb76c1e395..7773d5019e66 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/mdio/mdio-mscc-miim.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/mdio/mdio-mscc-miim.c
>> @@ -158,18 +158,18 @@ static int mscc_miim_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
>>  {
>>  	struct mscc_miim_dev *miim = bus->priv;
>>  	int offset = miim->phy_reset_offset;
>> +	int mask = PHY_CFG_PHY_ENA | PHY_CFG_PHY_COMMON_RESET |
>> +		   PHY_CFG_PHY_RESET;
> 
>> -		ret = regmap_write(miim->phy_regs,
>> -				   MSCC_PHY_REG_PHY_CFG + offset, 0x1ff);
>> +		ret = regmap_write(miim->phy_regs, offset, mask);
> 
> Is mask the correct name? It is not being used in the typical way for
> a mask.

It is the mask of all the reset bits, see also patch 3/3. Either all
these bits are set or none. Do you have any suggestion? I thought about
adding mask and value for the remap_update_bits() in patch 3/3 but
decided against it, just because it doesn't add any value because
mask and value are the same.

-michael