netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/4] net: lan743x: Migrate phylib to phylink

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZqjOmOzNLE0+oYP2@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:29:28 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Raju Lakkaraju <Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
	andrew@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org, hkallweit1@...il.com,
	richardcochran@...il.com, rdunlap@...radead.org,
	bryan.whitehead@...rochip.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
	pabeni@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 3/4] net: lan743x: Migrate phylib to phylink

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 04:18:20PM +0530, Raju Lakkaraju wrote:
> Ok. 
> After change, i ran the checkpatch script. it's giving follwoing warning
> i.e.
> "CHECK: Comparison to NULL could be written "dn"" 
> 
> Is it OK ?

Assuming its referring to:

        return dn != NULL;

in a function that returns a bool, I find that utterly perverse, and I
suggest in this case ignoring checkpatch.

> > > +static int lan743x_phylink_connect(struct lan743x_adapter *adapter)
> > > +{
> > > +     struct device_node *dn = adapter->pdev->dev.of_node;
> > > +     struct net_device *dev = adapter->netdev;
> > > +     struct fixed_phy_status fphy_status = {
> > > +             .link = 1,
> > > +             .speed = SPEED_1000,
> > > +             .duplex = DUPLEX_FULL,
> > > +     };
> > > +     struct phy_device *phydev;
> > > +     int ret;
> > > +
> > > +     if (dn)
> > > +             ret = phylink_of_phy_connect(adapter->phylink, dn, 0);
> > > +
> > > +     if (!dn || (ret && !lan743x_phy_handle_exists(dn))) {
> > > +             phydev = phy_find_first(adapter->mdiobus);
> > > +             if (!phydev) {
> > > +                     if (((adapter->csr.id_rev & ID_REV_ID_MASK_) ==
> > > +                           ID_REV_ID_LAN7431_) || adapter->is_pci11x1x) {
> > > +                             phydev = fixed_phy_register(PHY_POLL,
> > > +                                                         &fphy_status,
> > > +                                                         NULL);
> > > +                             if (IS_ERR(phydev)) {
> > > +                                     netdev_err(dev, "No PHY/fixed_PHY found\n");
> > > +                                     return PTR_ERR(phydev);
> > > +                             }
> > 
> > Eww. Given that phylink has its own internal fixed-PHY support, can we
> > not find some way to avoid the legacy fixed-PHY usage here?
> 
> Yes. I agree with you. This is very much valid suggestion.
> Andrew also gave same suggestion.
> 
> Currently we don't have Device Tree support for LAN743X driver. 
> For SFP support, I create the software-node an passing the paramters there.
> 
> I don't have fixed-PHY hardware setup currently.
> I would like to take this as action item to fix it after SFP support commits.

Note that SFP shouldn't be using a fixed-phy at all.

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