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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CO1PR11MB47715CFC7E22969BD00F9E6AE2769@CO1PR11MB4771.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 05:50:44 +0000 From: <Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com> To: <michael@...le.cc>, <o.rempel@...gutronix.de> CC: <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <andrew@...n.ch>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: micrel: Adding SQI support for lan8814 phy Hi Michael, > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc> > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2022 2:56 PM > To: Divya Koppera - I30481 <Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com>; Oleksij Rempel > <o.rempel@...gutronix.de> > Cc: UNGLinuxDriver <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>; andrew@...n.ch; > davem@...emloft.net; edumazet@...gle.com; hkallweit1@...il.com; > kuba@...nel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux@...linux.org.uk; > netdev@...r.kernel.org; pabeni@...hat.com > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: micrel: Adding SQI support for > lan8814 phy > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the > content is safe > > [+ Oleksij Rempel] > > Hi, > > Am 2022-08-26 11:11, schrieb Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com: > >> > Supports SQI(Signal Quality Index) for lan8814 phy, where it has > >> > SQI index of 0-7 values and this indicator can be used for cable > >> > integrity diagnostic and investigating other noise sources. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Divya Koppera <Divya.Koppera@...rochip.com> > > .. > > >> > +#define LAN8814_DCQ_CTRL_CHANNEL_MASK > GENMASK(1, > >> 0) > >> > +#define LAN8814_DCQ_SQI 0xe4 > >> > +#define LAN8814_DCQ_SQI_MAX 7 > >> > +#define LAN8814_DCQ_SQI_VAL_MASK GENMASK(3, 1) > >> > + > >> > static int lanphy_read_page_reg(struct phy_device *phydev, int > >> > page, > >> > u32 addr) { > >> > int data; > >> > @@ -2927,6 +2934,32 @@ static int lan8814_probe(struct phy_device > >> *phydev) > >> > return 0; > >> > } > >> > > >> > +static int lan8814_get_sqi(struct phy_device *phydev) { > >> > + int rc, val; > >> > + > >> > + val = lanphy_read_page_reg(phydev, 1, LAN8814_DCQ_CTRL); > >> > + if (val < 0) > >> > + return val; > >> > + > >> > + val &= ~LAN8814_DCQ_CTRL_CHANNEL_MASK; > >> > >> I do have a datasheet for this PHY, but it doesn't mention 0xe6 on > >> EP1. > > > > This register values are present in GPHY hard macro as below > > > > 4.2.225 DCQ Control Register > > Index (In Decimal): EP 1.230 Size: 16 bits > > > > Can you give me the name of the datasheet which you are following, so > > that I'll check and let you know the reason. > > I have the AN4286/DS00004286A ("LAN8804/LAN8814 GPHY Register > Definitions"). Maybe there is a newer version of it. > I just looked into it, it doesn't have SQI registers. I requested internal team to add SQI register set in published document. > > > >> So I can only guess that this "channel mask" is for the 4 rx/tx pairs > >> on GbE? > > > > Yes channel mask is for wire pair. > > > >> And you only seem to evaluate one of them. Is that the correct thing > >> to do here? > >> > > > > I found in below link is that, get_SQI returns sqi value for 100 > > base-t1 phy's > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200519075200.24631-2- > o.rempel@...gutronix.de/T/ > > That one is for the 100base-t1 which has only one pair. > > > In lan8814 phy only channel 0 is used for 100base-tx. So returning SQI > > value for channel 0. > > What if the other pairs are bad? Maybe Oleksij has an opinion here. > > Also 100baseTX (and 10baseT) has two pairs, one for transmitting and one > for receiving. I guess you meassure the SQI on the receiving side. So is > channel 0 correct here? > Yes Channel 0 is correct. > Again this is the first time I hear about SQI but it puzzles me that > it only evaluate one pair in this case. So as a user who reads this > SQI might be misleaded. > Yeah, It needs uAPI extension. > -michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists