netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] net: dsa: b53: remove eee_enabled/eee_active in b53_get_mac

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20240207135219.7wr4hctzjuanotxv@skbuf>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 15:52:19 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
	Byungho An <bh74.an@...sung.com>,
	Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
	Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>, Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] net: dsa: b53: remove
 eee_enabled/eee_active in b53_get_mac_eee()

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 08:25:17PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2/6/2024 5:29 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 01:12:33PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > > I know next to nothing about EEE and especially the implementation on
> > > > Broadcom switches. But is the information brought by B53_EEE_LPI_INDICATE
> > > > completely redundant? Is it actually in the system's best interest to
> > > > ignore it?
> > > 
> > > That's a review comment that should have been made when the original
> > > change to phylib was done, because it's already ignored in kernels
> > > today since the commit changing phylib that I've referenced in this
> > > series - since e->eee_enabled and e->eee_active will be overwritten by
> > > phylib.
> > 
> > That's fair, but commit d1420bb99515 ("net: phy: improve generic EEE
> > ethtool functions") is dated November 2018, and my involvement with the
> > kernel started in March 2019. So it would have been a bit difficult for
> > me to make this observation back then.
> > 
> > > If we need B53_EEE_LPI_INDICATE to do something, then we need to have
> > > a discussion about it, and decide how that fits in with the EEE
> > > interface, and how to work around phylib's implementation.
> > 
> > Hopefully Florian or Doug can quickly clarify whether this is the case
> > or not.
> 
> Russell's replacement is actually a better one because it will return a
> stable state. B53_EEE_LPI_INDICATE would indicate when the switch port's
> built-in PHY asserts the LPI signal to its MAC, which could be transient
> AFAICT.
> -- 
> Florian

Thanks, Florian.