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]
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 14:38:39 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Parthiban Veerasooran <Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>
Cc: hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
	edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ramon.nordin.rodriguez@...roamp.se, horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com,
	Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com,
	Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/6] net: phy: microchip_t1s: update LAN867x
 PHY supported revision number

> -#define PHY_ID_LAN867X 0x0007C160
> +#define PHY_ID_LAN867X_REVB1 0x0007C162

>  static struct phy_driver microchip_t1s_driver[] = {
>  	{
> -		PHY_ID_MATCH_MODEL(PHY_ID_LAN867X),
> -		.name               = "LAN867X",
> +		PHY_ID_MATCH_EXACT(PHY_ID_LAN867X_REVB1),
> +		.name               = "LAN867X Rev.B1",
>  		.features           = PHY_BASIC_T1S_P2MP_FEATURES,
> -		.config_init        = lan867x_config_init,
> +		.config_init        = lan867x_revb1_config_init,
>  		.read_status        = lan867x_read_status,
>  		.get_plca_cfg	    = genphy_c45_plca_get_cfg,
>  		.set_plca_cfg	    = genphy_c45_plca_set_cfg,
> @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static struct phy_driver microchip_t1s_driver[] = {
>  module_phy_driver(microchip_t1s_driver);
>  
>  static struct mdio_device_id __maybe_unused tbl[] = {
> -	{ PHY_ID_MATCH_MODEL(PHY_ID_LAN867X) },
> +	{ PHY_ID_MATCH_EXACT(PHY_ID_LAN867X_REVB1) },
>  	{ }
>  };

Maybe i asked this last time...

What versions actually exist? The old entry would match 0x0007C16X, so
0x0007C160 and 0x0007C161, 0x0007C162, if those actually exist. Now
you are narrowing it down to just 0x0007C162.

It would be good to comment on this in the commit message, that
0x0007C160 and 0x0007C161 never escaped the testing facility and hence
don't need to be supported.

	Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ