netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 5/8] net: phy: Immediately call adjust_link if only tx_lpi

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: <Zdic+ua5LnWxjLPn@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 13:26:18 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>,
	Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>,
	NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 5/8] net: phy: Immediately call adjust_link
 if only tx_lpi_enabled changes

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 02:17:59PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:38:20AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:44:22AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > +static void phy_ethtool_set_eee_noneg(struct phy_device *phydev,
> > > +				      struct ethtool_keee *data)
> > > +{
> > > +	if (phydev->eee_cfg.tx_lpi_enabled !=
> > > +	    data->tx_lpi_enabled) {
> > > +		eee_to_eeecfg(data, &phydev->eee_cfg);
> > > +		phydev->enable_tx_lpi = eeecfg_mac_can_tx_lpi(&phydev->eee_cfg);
> > > +		if (phydev->link)
> > > +			phy_link_up(phydev);
> > 
> > I'm not convinced this is a good idea. Hasn't phylib previously had
> > the guarantee that the link will go down between two link-up events?
> > So calling phy_link_up() may result in either the MAC driver ignoring
> > it, or modifying registers that are only supposed to be modified while
> > the MAC side is down.
> 
> When auto-neg is used, we expect the link to go down and come back up
> again.
> 
> Here we are dealing with the case that autoneg is not used. The MAC
> needs informing somehow. If we want to preserve the down/up, we could
> call phy_link_down() and then phy_link_up() back to back.

Would it be better to have a separate callback for EEE state (as I
mentioned in another comment on this series?) That would be better
for future SmartEEE support.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!