netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: ezra@synergy-village.org, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Tristram Ha <Tristram.Ha@microchip.com>,
	Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: mdio: Prevent Clause 45 scan on SMSC PHYs
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 15:06:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8eb06ee9-d02d-4113-ba1e-e8ee99acc2fd@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1297166c-38c1-4041-8a7f-403477b871cf@lunn.ch>

On 02.01.2024 14:42, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 01, 2024 at 11:44:38PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> On 01.01.2024 22:31, Ezra Buehler wrote:
>>> Since commit 1a136ca2e089 ("net: mdio: scan bus based on bus
>>> capabilities for C22 and C45") our AT91SAM9G25-based GARDENA smart
>>> Gateway will no longer boot.
>>>
>>> Prior to the mentioned change, probe_capabilities would be set to
>>> MDIOBUS_NO_CAP (0) and therefore, no Clause 45 scan was performed.
>>> Running a Clause 45 scan on an SMSC/Microchip LAN8720A PHY will (at
>>> least with our setup) considerably slow down kernel startup and
>>> ultimately result in a board reset.
>>>
>>> AFAICT all SMSC/Microchip PHYs are Clause 22 devices. Some have a
>>> "Clause 45 protection" feature (e.g. LAN8830) and others like the
>>> LAN8804 will explicitly state the following in the datasheet:
>>>
>>>     This device may respond to Clause 45 accesses and so must not be
>>>     mixed with Clause 45 devices on the same MDIO bus.
>>>
>>
>> I'm not convinced that some heuristic based on vendors is a
>> sustainable approach. Also I'd like to avoid (as far as possible)
>> that core code includes vendor driver headers. Maybe we could use
>> a new PHY driver flag. Approaches I could think of:
> 
> We already have a core hack for these broken PHYs:
> 
Excluding all PHY's from a vendor for me is a quite big hammer.
I think we should make this more granular.
And mdio-bus.c including micrel_phy.h also isn't too nice.
Maybe we should move all OUI definitions in drivers to a
core header. Because the OUI seems to be all we need from
these headers.

> /*
>  * There are some C22 PHYs which do bad things when where is a C45
>  * transaction on the bus, like accepting a read themselves, and
>  * stomping over the true devices reply, to performing a write to
>  * themselves which was intended for another device. Now that C22
>  * devices have been found, see if any of them are bad for C45, and if we
>  * should skip the C45 scan.
>  */
> static bool mdiobus_prevent_c45_scan(struct mii_bus *bus)
> {
>         int i;
> 
>         for (i = 0; i < PHY_MAX_ADDR; i++) {
>                 struct phy_device *phydev;
>                 u32 oui;
> 
>                 phydev = mdiobus_get_phy(bus, i);
>                 if (!phydev)
>                         continue;
>                 oui = phydev->phy_id >> 10;
> 
>                 if (oui == MICREL_OUI)
>                         return true;
>         }
>         return false;
> }
> 
> So it seems we need to extend this with another OUI.
> 
> 	Andrew


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-01-02 14:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-01 21:31 [PATCH net] net: mdio: Prevent Clause 45 scan on SMSC PHYs Ezra Buehler
2024-01-01 22:44 ` Heiner Kallweit
2024-01-02  8:50   ` Michael Walle
2024-01-02  9:14     ` Heiner Kallweit
2024-01-02 12:02   ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-02 13:42   ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-02 14:00     ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-02 14:04     ` Ezra Buehler
2024-01-02 14:06     ` Heiner Kallweit [this message]
2024-01-02 15:50       ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-02 18:08         ` Ezra Buehler
2024-01-02 18:57           ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-01-06 12:41             ` Ezra Buehler
2024-01-06 15:20               ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-07 13:51                 ` Ezra Buehler
2024-01-02 19:49           ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-02 20:05             ` Ezra Buehler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8eb06ee9-d02d-4113-ba1e-e8ee99acc2fd@gmail.com \
    --to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
    --cc=Tristram.Ha@microchip.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=ezra@synergy-village.org \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=michael@walle.cc \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).