Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: phy: sfp: Add support for SMBus module access

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>]

> You might be correct. As I have been running that code out-of-tree for
> a while, I was thinking that surely I'd have noticed if this was
> wrong, however there are only a few cases where we actually write to
> SFP :
> 
>  - sfp_modify_u8(...) => one-byte write
>  - in sfp_cotsworks_fixup_check(...) there are 2 writes : one 1-byte
> write and a 3-bytes write.
> 
> As I don't have any cotsworks SFP, then it looks like having the writes
> mis-ordered would have stayed un-noticed on my side as I only
> stressed the 1 byte write path...
> 
> So, good catch :) Let me triple-check and see if I can find any
> conceivable way of testing that...

Read might be more important than write. This is particularly
important for the second page containing the diagnostics, and dumped
by ethtool -m. It could be the sensor values latch when you read the
higher byte, so you can read the lower byte without worrying about it
changing. This is why we don't want HWMON, if you can only do byte
access. You might be able to test this with the temperature
sensor. The value is in 1/256 degrees. So if you can get is going from
21 255/256C to 22 0/256C and see if you ever read 21 0/256 or 22
255/256C.

	Andrew