netdev - [PATCH net 3/3] amd-xgbe: fix the SFP compliance codes check for DAC cables

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 6 Oct 2022 19:24:40 +0530
From:   Raju Rangoju <Raju.Rangoju@....com>
To:     <thomas.lendacky@....com>, <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <rrangoju@....com>,
        Raju Rangoju <Raju.Rangoju@....com>
Subject: [PATCH net 3/3] amd-xgbe: fix the SFP compliance codes check for DAC cables

The current XGBE code assumes that offset 3 and 6 of EEPROM SFP DAC
(passive) cables are NULL. It also assumes the offset 12 is in the
range 0x64 to 0x68. However, some of the cables (the 5 meter and 7 meter
molex passive cables have non-zero data at offset 3 and 6, also a value
0x78 at offset 12. So, fix the sfp compliance codes check to ignore
those offsets. Also extend the macro XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_10GBE range to 0x78.

Fixes: abf0a1c2b26a ("amd-xgbe: Add support for SFP+ modules")
Signed-off-by: Raju Rangoju <Raju.Rangoju@....com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/amd/xgbe/xgbe-phy-v2.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/xgbe/xgbe-phy-v2.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/xgbe/xgbe-phy-v2.c
index 23fbd89a29df..0387e691be68 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/xgbe/xgbe-phy-v2.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/xgbe/xgbe-phy-v2.c
@@ -238,7 +238,7 @@ enum xgbe_sfp_speed {
 #define XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_1GBE_MIN		0x0a
 #define XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_1GBE_MAX		0x0d
 #define XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_10GBE_MIN		0x64
-#define XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_10GBE_MAX		0x68
+#define XGBE_SFP_BASE_BR_10GBE_MAX		0x78
 
 #define XGBE_SFP_BASE_CU_CABLE_LEN		18
 
@@ -1151,7 +1151,10 @@ static void xgbe_phy_sfp_parse_eeprom(struct xgbe_prv_data *pdata)
 	}
 
 	/* Determine the type of SFP */
-	if (sfp_base[XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC] & XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC_SR)
+	if (phy_data->sfp_cable == XGBE_SFP_CABLE_PASSIVE &&
+	    xgbe_phy_sfp_bit_rate(sfp_eeprom, XGBE_SFP_SPEED_10000))
+		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_10000_CR;
+	else if (sfp_base[XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC] & XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC_SR)
 		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_10000_SR;
 	else if (sfp_base[XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC] & XGBE_SFP_BASE_10GBE_CC_LR)
 		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_10000_LR;
@@ -1167,9 +1170,6 @@ static void xgbe_phy_sfp_parse_eeprom(struct xgbe_prv_data *pdata)
 		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_1000_CX;
 	else if (sfp_base[XGBE_SFP_BASE_1GBE_CC] & XGBE_SFP_BASE_1GBE_CC_T)
 		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_1000_T;
-	else if ((phy_data->sfp_cable == XGBE_SFP_CABLE_PASSIVE) &&
-		 xgbe_phy_sfp_bit_rate(sfp_eeprom, XGBE_SFP_SPEED_10000))
-		phy_data->sfp_base = XGBE_SFP_BASE_10000_CR;
 
 	switch (phy_data->sfp_base) {
 	case XGBE_SFP_BASE_1000_T:
-- 
2.25.1