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: <CAMRc=MdLky5sUbdFGFc+as906kr-J_XDmKmYtBBCHvETvqtAQA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2023 14:16:50 +0200 From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> To: Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>, Srini Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8775p-ride: move the reset-gpios property of the PHY On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 12:27 AM Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 11:51:40PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > I have proposed a solution for this problem in 2020 but it never got > > > > upstream. Now we have a workaround in place which allows us to hard-code > > > > the PHY id in the compatible property, thus skipping the ID scanning). > > > > > > nitpicky, but I think that already existed at that time :D > > > > Yes, it has been there are long long time. It is however only in the > > last 5 years of so has it been seen as a solution to the chicken egg > > problem. > > > > > > sgmii_phy: phy@8 { > > > > + compatible = "ethernet-phy-id0141.0dd4"; > > > > reg = <0x8>; > > > > device_type = "ethernet-phy"; > > > > + reset-gpios = <&pmm8654au_2_gpios 8 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > > > > + reset-deassert-us = <70000>; > > > > > > Doesn't this need reset-assert-us? > > > > If i remember correctly, there is a default value if DT does not > > provide one. > > > > I've been trying to make sure I view devicetree properties as an OS > agnostic ABI lately, with that in mind... > > The dt-binding says this for ethernet-phy: > > reset-assert-us: > description: > Delay after the reset was asserted in microseconds. If this > property is missing the delay will be skipped. > > If the hardware needs a delay I think we should encode it based on that > description, else we risk it starting to look like a unit impulse! > Please note that the mdio-level delay properties are not the same as the ones on the PHY levels. reset-delay-us - this is the delay BEFORE *DEASSERTING* the reset line reset-post-delay-us - this is the delay AFTER *DEASSERTING* the reset line On PHY level we have: reset-assert-us - AFTER *ASSERTING* reset-deassert-us - AFTER *DEASSERTING* There never has been any reset-assert delay on that line before. It doesn't look like we need a delay BEFORE deasserting the line, do we? Bart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists