netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: phy: add phy_disable

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: <6b7af899-2b20-493b-abfb-00e8310f7874@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 09:41:25 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: phy: add phy_disable_eee

On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 06:59:09PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:43:11 +0100 Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > @@ -2071,6 +2071,7 @@ void phy_advertise_eee_all(struct phy_device *phydev);
> > >  void phy_support_sym_pause(struct phy_device *phydev);
> > >  void phy_support_asym_pause(struct phy_device *phydev);
> > >  void phy_support_eee(struct phy_device *phydev);
> > > +void phy_disable_eee(struct phy_device *phydev);  
> > 
> > So we have three states:
> > 
> > MAC tells PHYLIB it does support EEE
> > MAC tells PHYLIB it does not support EEE
> > MAC says nothing.
> > 
> > Do we really want this?
> 
> Hi Andrew, do you feel convinced? I think I messed up merging some EEE
> patches recently, an explicit Ack would boost my confidence..

For phylib, yes, we have to live with this unknown state. so these
patches are O.K.

For phylink, i would like Russells opinion. It would be better if we
could avoid having the third state. Maybe we need a couple of cycles
where if the MAC says nothing, but the PHY negotiates EEE, we issue a
warning? We might then get an idea of how many systems are in this
unknown category, and can encourage MAC driver Maintainers to add the
missing EEE support.

Russell?

	Andrew