netdev - Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] net: stmmac: do not poke MAC_CTRL

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: <99839201-6c30-b455-2f32-ea0f992427fc@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Aug 2022 20:25:05 +0200
From:   Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
To:     Erico Nunes <nunes.erico@...il.com>,
        Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
Cc:     Da Xue <da@...sconfused.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        Vyacheslav <adeep@...ina.in>, Qi Duan <qi.duan@...ogic.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH] net: stmmac: do not poke MAC_CTRL_REG twice on
 link up

On 29.08.2022 12:29, Erico Nunes wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:02 PM Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jerome, can you confirm that after this commit the following is no longer needed?
>>>>> 2c87c6f9fbdd ("net: phy: meson-gxl: improve link-up behavior")
>>
>> This never had any meaningful impact for me. I have already reverted it
>> for testing.
>>
>> I'm all for reverting it
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I'd revert it, referencing the successor workaround / fix in stmmac.
> If we are considering to revert that, I would like to trigger some
> tests on my S805X CI board farm as well, to ensure it won't regress
> later. That was one of the original reasons for that patch.
> 
> Since there are some more changes referenced in this thread, can
> someone clarify what is the desired state to test? Just revert
> 2c87c6f9fbdd on top of linux-next, or also apply some other patch?

Yes, just revert 2c87c6f9fbdd on top of linux-next.