netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/8] dt-bindings: phy: mediatek,xfi-pextp: add new bindings

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: <ZXz6g0Su-kNPA3rX@makrotopia.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2023 01:16:51 +0000
From: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
	Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
	Mark Lee <Mark-MC.Lee@...iatek.com>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Alexander Couzens <lynxis@...0.eu>,
	Qingfang Deng <dqfext@...il.com>,
	SkyLake Huang <SkyLake.Huang@...iatek.com>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/8] dt-bindings: phy:
 mediatek,xfi-pextp: add new bindings

On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 02:20:45PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Because it is only present in one of the two SerDes channels.
> > Channel 0 needs the work-around, Channel 1 doesn't.
> 
> Does the channel know its own number?

As far as I know we can't infer the channel number by any of the
registers default values.

We could infer it from the base address, and that would kinda defy the
purpose of having Device Tree to begin with in my feeling at least,
but it would be possible, of course.