netdev - Re: FWD: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: Make flow control, speed, and duplex on CPU port configurable

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: <20230411132617.nonvvtll7xxvadhr@skbuf>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2023 16:26:17 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: Make
 flow control, speed, and duplex on CPU port configurable

On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 01:00:43PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> 	ethtool --pause ... autoneg on
> 	ethtool --pause ... autoneg off rx off tx off
> 	ethtool --pause ... autoneg off rx on tx on
> 
> Anything else wouldn't give the result the user wants, because there's
> no way to independently force rx and tx flow control per port.

Right.

> That said, phylink doesn't give enough information to make the above
> possible since the force bit depends on (tx && rx &&!permit_pause_to_mac)

So, since the "permit_pause_to_mac" information is missing here, I guess
the next logical step based on what you're saying is that it's a matter
of not using the pcs_config() API, or am I misunderstanding again? :)

> So, because this hardware is that crazy, I suggest that it *doesn't*
> even attempt to support ethtool --pause, and either is programmed
> at setup time to use autonegotiated pause (with the negotiation state
> programmed via ethtool -s) or it's programmed to have pause globally
> disabled. Essentially, I'm saying the hardware is too broken in its
> design to be worth bothering trying to work around its weirdness.

Ok. How can this driver reject changes made through ethtool --pause?