netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add erratum 3.14 for 88E6390X and 88E6190X

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: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 17:25:12 +0200
From: Ante Knezic <ante.knezic@...mholz.de>
To: <olteanv@...il.com>
CC: <andrew@...n.ch>, <ante.knezic@...mholz.de>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add erratum 3.14 for 88E6390X and 88E6190X

> > > It does not apply cleanly to net-next. Please respin. You can retain
> > > Andrew's Reviewed-by tag.
> > 
> > Respin might need a complete rework of the patch as with the
> > conversion of 88e639x to phylink_pcs (introduced with commit
> > e5b732a275f5fae0f1342fb8cf76de654cd51e50) the original code flow
> > has completely changed so it will not be as simple as finding a new
> > place to stick the patch. 
> > The new phylink mostly hides away mv88e6xxx_chip struct which is needed 
> > to identify the correct device and writing to relevant registers has also
> > changed in favor of mv88e639x_pcs struct etc.
> > I think you can see where I am going with this. In this sense I am not sure 
> > about keeping the Reviewed-by tag, more likely a complete rewrite 
> > should be done.
> > I will repost V3 once I figure out how to make it work with the new
> > framework.
> > 
> 
> Can't you simply replicate the positioning of mv88e6393x_erratum_4_6()
> from mv88e6393x_pcs_init()?

I don't think so. The erratum from the patch needs to be applied on each
SERDES reconfiguration or reset. For example, when replugging different 
SFPs (sgmii - 10g - sgmii interface). Erratum 4_6 is done only once? 
My guess is to put it in mv88e639x_sgmii_pcs_post_config but still I 
need the device product number - maybe embedding a pointer to the 
mv88e6xxx_chip chip inside the mv88e639x_pcs struct would be the cleanest way.