netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: sfp: enhance quirk for Fibrestore 2.5G copper SFP module

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: <20240423134557.2a2f67c6@dellmb>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:45:57 +0200
From: Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>, Raju
 Lakkaraju <Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com>, Frank Wunderlich
 <frank-w@...lic-files.de>, Eric Woudstra <ericwouds@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: sfp: enhance quirk for Fibrestore
 2.5G copper SFP module

On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:41:33 +0200
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:

> Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 10:50:39AM CEST, kabel@...nel.org wrote:
> >Enhance the quirk for Fibrestore 2.5G copper SFP module. The original
> >commit e27aca3760c0 ("net: sfp: add quirk for FS's 2.5G copper SFP")
> >introducing the quirk says that the PHY is inaccessible, but that is
> >not true.
> >
> >The module uses Rollball protocol to talk to the PHY, and needs a 4
> >second wait before probing it, same as FS 10G module.
> >
> >The PHY inside the module is Realtek RTL8221B-VB-CG PHY. The realtek
> >driver recently gained support to set it up via clause 45 accesses.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
> >---
> >This patch depends on realtek driver changes merged in
> >  c31bd5b6ff6f ("Merge branch 'rtl8226b-serdes-switching'")
> >which are currently only in net-next.  
> 
> I don't follow. You are targetting net-next (by patch subject), what's
> the point of this comment?

I wrote that in case someone wanted me to send this to net, instead of
net-next.

Marek