netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/4] phy: aquantia: Determine rate adaptation support from registers

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: <20230105175542.ozqn67o3qmadnaph@skbuf>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2023 19:55:42 +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 07:52:06PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 12:43:47PM -0500, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > Again, this is to comply with the existing API assumptions. The current
> > code is buggy. Of course, another way around this is to modify the API.
> > I have chosen this route because I don't have a situation like you
> > described. But if support for that is important to you, I encourage you
> > to refactor things.
> 
> I don't think I'm aware of a practical situation like that either.
> I remember seeing some S32G boards with Aquantia PHYs which use 2500BASE-X
> for 2.5G and SGMII for <=1G, but that's about it in terms of protocol switching.
> As for Layerscape boards, SERDES protocol switching is a very new concept there,
> so they're all going to be provisioned for PAUSE all the way down
> (or USXGMII, where that is available).
> 
> I just pointed this out because it jumped out to me. I don't have
> something against this patch getting accepted as it is.

A real-life (albeit niche) scenario where someone might have an Aquantia
firmware provisioned like this would be a 10G capable port that also
wants to support half duplex at 10/100 speeds. Although I'm not quite
sure who cares about half duplex all that much these days.