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: <65099b67-b7dc-4d78-ba42-d550aae2c31e@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 18:51:55 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
	Russ Weight <russ.weight@...ux.dev>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Dent Project <dentproject@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 14/17] dt-bindings: net: pse-pd: Add bindings
 for PD692x0 PSE controller

> Hm.. good question. I didn't found the answer in the spec. By combining all
> puzzle parts I assume, different Alternative configurations are designed
> to handle conflict between "PSE Physical Layer classification" and PHY
> autoneg.
> 
> Here is how multi-pulse Physical Layer classification is done:
> https://img.electronicdesign.com/files/base/ebm/electronicdesign/image/2020/07/Figure_5.5f2094553a61c.png
> 
> this is the source:
> https://www.electronicdesign.com/technologies/power/whitepaper/21137799/silicon-labs-90-w-power-over-ethernet-explained
> 
> To avoid classification conflict with autoneg. Assuming, PHY on PD side
> will be not powered until classification is completed. The only source
> of pulses is the PHY on PSE side (if it is not under control of software
> on PSE side or Midspan PSE is used), so aneg pulses should be send on
> negative PoE pair? This all is just speculation, I would need to ask
> some expert or do testing.
> 
> If this assumption is correct, PHY framework will need to know exact
> layout of MDI-X setting and/or silent PHY until PSE classification is done.

Ideally, we don't want to define a DT binding, and then find it is
wrong for 1000BaseT and above and we need to change it.

So, either somebody needs to understand 1000BaseT and can say the
proposed binding works, or we explicitly document the binding is
limited to 10BaseT and 100BaseT.

I'm not sure the second solution will actually fly. This was being
tested with Marvell Prestera switch. I doubt it even has any Fast
Ethernet ports.

	Andrew


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ