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: <20230105173445.72rvdt4etvteageq@skbuf>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 19:34:45 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Tim Harvey <tharvey@...eworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/4] phy: aquantia: Determine rate adaptation
 support from registers

On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:21:14AM -0500, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > Your code walks through the speed_table[] of media speeds (from 10M up
> > until the max speed of the SERDES) and sees whether the PHY was
> > provisioned, for that speed, to use PAUSE rate adaptation.
> 
> This is because we assume that if a phy supports rate matching for a phy
> interface mode, then it supports rate matching to all slower speeds that
> it otherwise supports. This seemed like a pretty reasonable assumption
> when I wrote the code, but it turns out that some firmwares don't abide
> by this. This is firstly a problem with the firmware (as it should be
> configured so that Linux can use the phy's features), but we have to be
> careful not to end up with an unsupported combination.

When you say "problem with the firmware", you're referring specifically
to my example (10GBASE-R for >1G speeds, SGMII for <=1G speeds)?

Why do you consider this a firmware misconfiguration? Let's say the host
supports both 10GBASE-R and SGMII, but the system designer preferred not
to use PAUSE-based rate adaptation for the speeds where native rate
adaptation was available.

> > If the PHY firmware uses a combination like this: 10GBASE-R/XFI for
> > media speeds of 10G, 5G, 2.5G (rate adapted), and SGMII for 1G, 100M
> > and 10M, a call to your implementation of
> > aqr107_get_rate_matching(PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_10GBASER) would return
> > RATE_MATCH_NONE, right?
> 
> Correct.
> 
> > So only ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_10000baseT_Full_BIT
> > would be advertised on the media side?
> 
> If the host only supports 10GBASE-R and nothing else. If the host
> supports SGMII as well, we will advertise 10G, 1G, 100M, and 10M. But
> really, this is a problem with the firmware, since if the host supports
> only 10GBASE-R, then the firmware should be set up to rate adapt to all
> speeds.

So we lose the advertisement of 5G and 2.5G, even if the firmware is
provisioned for them via 10GBASE-R rate adaptation, right? Because when
asked "What kind of rate matching is supported for 10GBASE-R?", the
Aquantia driver will respond "None".

> > Shouldn't you take into consideration in your aqr107_rate_adapt_ok()
> > function only the media side link speeds for which the PHY was actually
> > *configured* to use the SERDES protocol @iface?
> 
> No, because we don't know what phy interface modes are actually going to
> be used. The phy doesn't know whether e.g. the host supports both
> 10GBASE-R and SGMII or whether it only supports 10GBASE-R. With the
> current API we cannot say "I support 5G" without also saying "I support
> 1G". If you don't like this, please send a patch for an API returning
> supported speeds for a phy interface mode.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ