netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: pcs: pcs-mtk-lynxi: implement pcs_inband

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: <Z3aHUYOxCEGf9S_H@pidgin.makrotopia.org>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 12:32:17 +0000
From: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Eric Woudstra <ericwouds@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Alexander Couzens <lynxis@...0.eu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: pcs: pcs-mtk-lynxi: implement
 pcs_inband_caps() method

On Thu, Jan 02, 2025 at 08:59:13AM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 08:49:58AM +0100, Eric Woudstra wrote:
> > On 12/5/24 10:42 AM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > Report the PCS in-band capabilities to phylink for the LynxI PCS.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/net/pcs/pcs-mtk-lynxi.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-mtk-lynxi.c b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-mtk-lynxi.c
> > > index 4f63abe638c4..7de804535229 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-mtk-lynxi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-mtk-lynxi.c
> > > @@ -88,6 +88,21 @@ static struct mtk_pcs_lynxi *pcs_to_mtk_pcs_lynxi(struct phylink_pcs *pcs)
> > >  	return container_of(pcs, struct mtk_pcs_lynxi, pcs);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static unsigned int mtk_pcs_lynxi_inband_caps(struct phylink_pcs *pcs,
> > > +					      phy_interface_t interface)
> > > +{
> > > +	switch (interface) {
> > > +	case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_1000BASEX:
> > > +	case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500BASEX:
> > 
> > Isn't this the place now where to report to phylink, that this PCS does
> > not support in-band at 2500base-x?
> 
> No - look at the arguments to this function. What arguments would this
> function make a decision whether in-band is supported in any interface
> mode?
> 
> The correct place is the .pcs_inband_caps(), which from reading the
> code, I understood that in-band can be used at 2500base-X with this
> PCS. See
> https://patch.msgid.link/E1tJ8NR-006L5P-E3@rmk-PC.armlinux.org.uk
> which was merged at the beginning of December, and if you are correct,
> the patch was wrong.

Yes, that patch was wrong. Neither is QSGMII supported at all by the
LynxI hardware, nor can in-band-status be used in 2500Base-X mode.
I will send a patch to fix that.