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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230511083620.15203ebe@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 08:36:20 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com> Cc: Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, glipus@...il.com, maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, richardcochran@...il.com, gerhard@...leder-embedded.com, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v4 4/5] net: Let the active time stamping layer be selectable. On Thu, 11 May 2023 16:48:07 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > Ok, right you move it on to dsa stub. What do you think of our case, should we > > continue with netdev notifier? > > I don't know. > > AFAIU, the plan forward with this patch set is that, if the active > timestamping layer is the PHY, phy_mii_ioctl() gets called and the MAC > driver does not get notified in any way of that. That is an issue > because if it's a switch, it will want to trap PTP even if it doesn't > timestamp it, and with this proposal it doesn't get a chance to do that. > > What is your need for this? Do you have this scenario? If not, just drop > this part from the patch. > > Jakub, you said "nope" to netdev notifiers, what would you suggest here > instead? ndo_change_ptp_traps()? More importantly "monolithic" drivers have DMA/MAC/PHY all under the NDO so assuming that SOF_PHY_TIMESTAMPING implies a phylib PHY is not going to work. We need a more complex calling convention for the NDO.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists