netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/6] net: stmmac: support future possible different internal phy mode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 29 Jun 2017 19:02:38 +0200
From:   Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, wens@...e.org,
        peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com,
        andre.przywara@....com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] net: stmmac: support future possible different
 internal phy mode

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:23:49PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:28:01 +0200
> 
> > The current way to find if the phy is internal is to compare DT phy-mode
> > and emac_variant/internal_phy.
> > But it will negate a possible future SoC where an external PHY use the
> > same phy mode than the internal one.
> > 
> > By using phy-mode = "internal" we permit to have an external PHY with
> > the same mode than the internal one.
> > 
> > Reported-by: André Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
> > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
> 
> Series applied.
> 
> Please provide a proper "[PATCH 0/n] " header posting next time.

Sorry could you wait for applying, there are a parallel thread (http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg183520.html) and it seems finaly that internal could not be the good way to do it.

Regards
Sorry again, I should have sent a comment for waiting.