linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net/dt: Add support for overriding phy configuration from device tree

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]

Message-ID: <1389883203.3720.7.camel@x230>
Date:	Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:40:04 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
To:	"gsi@...x.de" <gsi@...x.de>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kishon@...com" <kishon@...com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/dt: Add support for overriding phy configuration
 from device tree

On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 14:59 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote:

> These properties are booleans, and optional?  Does it mean that
> you cannot _disable_ broken features?  Or does it mean that you
> _must_ specify the non-broken features and thus break backwards
> compatibility?  Or are these properties not boolean (they are not
> used in the example either, unfortunately), and the binding text
> would need an update for clarity?  What am I missing?

They're not booleans. I'll update the text to make that clear.

-- 
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>