linux-kernel - Re: RFC: Platform data for onboard USB assets

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: <4D830E97.4010403@linaro.org>
Date:	Fri, 18 Mar 2011 07:49:43 +0000
From:	Andy Green <andy@...mcat.com>
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
CC:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	Linux USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: Platform data for onboard USB assets

On 03/17/2011 11:27 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:

> The patch below also looks right to me.  I believe it also has the
> advantage of u-boot already knowing how to update the
> local-mac-address property at boot time.

In my (tested, working, complete) patch series, I allow platform_data 
based override of MAC at usbnet level, so all the drivers can benefit 
from it.

Is this not a case of "small thinking" from a Device Tree perspective 
that Arnd's patch only targets smsc95xx?  Or did I miss some 
disadvantage to allowing this functional configuration option at usbnet 
layer?

-Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/