netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/7] ethtool: add interface to interact with Ethernet Power Equipment

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]

Message-ID: <20220825185642.GB2116@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Thu, 25 Aug 2022 20:56:42 +0200
From:   Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
        Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
        Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/7] ethtool: add interface to interact with
 Ethernet Power Equipment

On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 11:07:56AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2022 15:02:10 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > +void ethtool_set_ethtool_pse_ops(const struct ethtool_pse_ops *ops)
> > +{
> > +	rtnl_lock();
> > +	ethtool_pse_ops = ops;
> > +	rtnl_unlock();
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ethtool_set_ethtool_pse_ops);
> 
> Do we really need the loose linking on the PSE ops?
> It's not a lot of code, and the pcdev->ops should be 
> enough to decouple drivers, it seems.

Right now i have no good idea how to properly decouple pse-pd from phydev.

@Andrew, should i care about it on this stage or it is currently not a
big deal?

> > +static int pse_set_pse_config(struct net_device *dev,
> > +			      struct netlink_ext_ack *extack,
> > +			      struct nlattr **tb)
> > +{
> > +	struct phy_device *phydev = dev->phydev;
> > +	struct pse_control_config config = {};
> > +	const struct ethtool_pse_ops *ops;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	if (!tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL])
> > +		return 0;
> 
> If SET has no useful attrs the usual response is -EINVAL.

ack

> > +	ops = ethtool_pse_ops;
> > +	if (!ops || !ops->set_config)
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	config.admin_cotrol = nla_get_u8(tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL]);
> > +
> > +	if (!phydev)
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	// todo resolve phydev dependecy
> 
> My lack of phydev understanding and laziness are likely the cause,
> but I haven't found an explanation for this todo. What is it about?

sorry. old artifact, will be removed. It is part of phydev/phylink
related discussion in the last patch version.

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |