From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fXiLV-0008A0-L6 for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 07:25:10 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:24:48 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20180626072448.smynzauggpjcyknd@pengutronix.de> References: <20180622163012.1590-1-nikita.yoush@cogentembedded.com> <20180625123433.jo75zl77bovldzc2@pengutronix.de> <1ef31458-200c-b132-5b86-fabdc92a810d@cogentembedded.com> <20180626060034.75o36ndv2bdawwk2@pengutronix.de> <20180626064618.j6mjqjpmff46hqwd@pengutronix.de> <56f9d1d6-1129-b526-00d2-21fd17c93368@cogentembedded.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: avoid assigning ethaddr to wrong devices To: Nikita Yushchenko Cc: Andrey Smirnov , barebox@lists.infradead.org, Chris Healy On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:09:36AM +0300, Nikita Yushchenko wrote: > > > 26.06.2018 10:05, Nikita Yushchenko wrote: > >>>> It's PowerPC hardware which on barebox is not probed from devicetree, so > >>>> indeed there is no device node. > >>> > >>> But if no device tree, then > >>> alias = of_find_node_by_alias(of_get_root_node(), eth); > >>> should return NULL, and eth_is_stranger() should return false, thus > >>> making my patch no-op? > >> > >> Ok, you are right. I misread the code. You call of_find_node_by_alias() > >> on the internal device tree, not the one the Kernel is started with, so > >> indeed eth_is_stranger() should return false. > >> > >> Nevertheless I do not like this patch very much as it adds more code to > >> a place that is already hard to understand in all of its consequences. > >> > >> I would like to explore the route that we assign these dynamic devices > >> an id that is not present in any alias node. That could be done by > >> searching for the highest alias number and give the dynamic devices one > >> number higher. Would that be doable? > > > > Dynamic device number is assigned via > > - setting id to DEVICE_ID_DYNAMIC, either by driver or by code at top of > > eth_register(), > > - replacing that with lowest currently-unused number at top of > > register_device() > > > > Probably we can add one more magic value that driver could set into > > edev->dev.id before calling eth_register(), that will be replaced with > > lowest currently-unused number that does not have aliases. However, this > > will change eth numbering in existing setups and thus can break them. > > > > Possible option could be a flag in edev that forbids setting/exporting > > ethaddr for this device. Doing so for usbnet seems safe. This will fix > > my case. > > Thinking more on this, maybe cleaner is NOT to match by id of in-barebox > ethdevice when setting/exporting ethaddr by default, but explicitly > allow such matching for platforms that need it. Yes, that would be a good solution. Maybe struct eth_device could get a new char *of_alias field which the network driver populates from the platform_data. Since Renauds address bounces I'm not sure how much interest he still has in the barebox port of the boards using this feature. I think the devices are all registered with fsl_eth_init(). I would think that he does the board fixup himself if he still has interest, but we should prepare the network device generic part. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox