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: <3c0f31ce-38a8-4f1e-8c39-6aa6ac879dc6@hauke-m.de>
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2025 18:05:28 +0200
From: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Greg Ungerer
 <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
 Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew@...n.ch>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
 Takumi Sueda <puhitaku@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: fixed: let fixed_phy_add always use
 addr 0 and remove return value

On 8/22/25 22:36, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> We have only two users of fixed_phy_add(), both use address 0 and
> ignore the return value. So simplify fixed_phy_add() accordingly.
> 
> Whilst at it, constify the fixed_phy_status configs.
> 
> Note:
> fixed_phy_add() is a legacy function which shouldn't be used in new
> code, as it's use may be problematic:
> - No check whether a fixed phy exists already at the given address
> - If fixed_phy_register() is called afterwards by any other driver,
>    then it will also use phy_addr 0, because fixed_phy_add() ignores
>    the ida which manages address assignment
> Drivers using a fixed phy created by fixed_phy_add() in platform code,
> should dynamically create a fixed phy with fixed_phy_register()
> instead.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
> ---
>   arch/m68k/coldfire/m5272.c  | 4 ++--
>   arch/mips/bcm47xx/setup.c   | 4 ++--
>   drivers/net/phy/fixed_phy.c | 4 ++--
>   include/linux/phy_fixed.h   | 8 ++------
>   4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/m68k/coldfire/m5272.c b/arch/m68k/coldfire/m5272.c
> index 5b70dfdab..918e2a323 100644
> --- a/arch/m68k/coldfire/m5272.c
> +++ b/arch/m68k/coldfire/m5272.c
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ void __init config_BSP(char *commandp, int size)
>    * an ethernet switch. In this case we need to use the fixed phy type,
>    * and we need to declare it early in boot.
>    */
> -static struct fixed_phy_status nettel_fixed_phy_status __initdata = {
> +static const struct fixed_phy_status nettel_fixed_phy_status __initconst = {
>   	.link	= 1,
>   	.speed	= 100,
>   	.duplex	= 0,
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ static struct fixed_phy_status nettel_fixed_phy_status __initdata = {
>   static int __init init_BSP(void)
>   {
>   	m5272_uarts_init();
> -	fixed_phy_add(0, &nettel_fixed_phy_status);
> +	fixed_phy_add(&nettel_fixed_phy_status);
>   	clkdev_add_table(m5272_clk_lookup, ARRAY_SIZE(m5272_clk_lookup));
>   	return 0;
>   }
> diff --git a/arch/mips/bcm47xx/setup.c b/arch/mips/bcm47xx/setup.c
> index de426a474..a93a4266d 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/bcm47xx/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/bcm47xx/setup.c
> @@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ static int __init bcm47xx_cpu_fixes(void)
>   }
>   arch_initcall(bcm47xx_cpu_fixes);
>   
> -static struct fixed_phy_status bcm47xx_fixed_phy_status __initdata = {
> +static const struct fixed_phy_status bcm47xx_fixed_phy_status __initconst = {
>   	.link	= 1,
>   	.speed	= SPEED_100,
>   	.duplex	= DUPLEX_FULL,
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static int __init bcm47xx_register_bus_complete(void)
>   	bcm47xx_leds_register();
>   	bcm47xx_workarounds();
>   
> -	fixed_phy_add(0, &bcm47xx_fixed_phy_status);
> +	fixed_phy_add(&bcm47xx_fixed_phy_status);
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   device_initcall(bcm47xx_register_bus_complete);
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/fixed_phy.c b/drivers/net/phy/fixed_phy.c
> index 7902b35c5..b39532abf 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/fixed_phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/fixed_phy.c
> @@ -153,9 +153,9 @@ static int fixed_phy_add_gpiod(unsigned int irq, int phy_addr,
>   	return 0;
>   }
>   
> -int fixed_phy_add(int phy_addr, const struct fixed_phy_status *status)
> +void fixed_phy_add(const struct fixed_phy_status *status)
>   {
> -	return fixed_phy_add_gpiod(PHY_POLL, phy_addr, status, NULL);
> +	fixed_phy_add_gpiod(PHY_POLL, 0, status, NULL);
>   }
>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fixed_phy_add);
>   
> diff --git a/include/linux/phy_fixed.h b/include/linux/phy_fixed.h
> index 5399b9e41..6227a1bde 100644
> --- a/include/linux/phy_fixed.h
> +++ b/include/linux/phy_fixed.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ struct net_device;
>   
>   #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FIXED_PHY)
>   extern int fixed_phy_change_carrier(struct net_device *dev, bool new_carrier);
> -int fixed_phy_add(int phy_id, const struct fixed_phy_status *status);
> +void fixed_phy_add(const struct fixed_phy_status *status);
>   struct phy_device *fixed_phy_register(const struct fixed_phy_status *status,
>   				      struct device_node *np);
>   
> @@ -26,11 +26,7 @@ extern int fixed_phy_set_link_update(struct phy_device *phydev,
>   			int (*link_update)(struct net_device *,
>   					   struct fixed_phy_status *));
>   #else
> -static inline int fixed_phy_add(int phy_id,
> -				const struct fixed_phy_status *status)
> -{
> -	return -ENODEV;
> -}
> +static inline void fixed_phy_add(const struct fixed_phy_status *status) {}
>   static inline struct phy_device *
>   fixed_phy_register(const struct fixed_phy_status *status,
>   		   struct device_node *np)

Hi,

I do not use this hardware any more, but Takumi reported that 
fixed_phy_add() is not working for the PHY registration on brcm47xx any 
more and we have to use fixed_phy_register(), see:
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/19610

Does this need a bigger refactoring anyway?

Hauke

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ