netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: add Protonic PRT8ML board

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: <20250918173347.28db5569@erd003.prtnl>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 17:33:47 +0200
From: David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Jonas Rebmann <jre@...gutronix.de>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
 <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Liam Girdwood
 <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Shengjiu Wang
 <shengjiu.wang@....com>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer
 <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Pengutronix
 Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, Vladimir Oltean
 <vladimir.oltean@....com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
 Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: add Protonic PRT8ML board

On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 17:04:55 +0200
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:

> > Yes, unfortunately the SJA1105Q does not support PAUSE frames, and the i.MX8MP
> > FEC isn't able to sustain 1000Mbps (only about 400ish) due to insufficient
> > internal bus bandwidth. It will generate PAUSE frames, but the SJA1105Q
> > ignores these, leading to packet loss, which is obviously worse than
> > restricting this link to 100Mbps. Ironically both chips are from the same
> > manufacturer, yet are incompatible in this regard.  
> 
> Thanks for the explanation. Maybe add a comment that the bandwidth is
> limited due to the lack of flow control resulting in packet loss in
> the FEC.
>
> Anything which looks odd deserves a comment, otherwise somebody will
> question it....

Yes! This is a golden tip. Ironically what I said above is incorrect. Sorry
for the noise.

Ftr: I wrote this DT about 4 years ago, so my memory failed me, and a comment
in the code would have saved me this embarrassment ;-)

The comment above applies to the i.MX6 SoC's which had this limitation. On the
i.MX8MP we had a different problem that also caused the SJA1105Q not to work
reliably at 1000Mbps either. We haven't been able to find the issue, but so far
this switch hasn't been able to work at 1000Mbps reliable on any platform,
possibly for different reasons in each case.

Best regards,

-- 
David Jander