linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: mv88e6060: cleanup and fix setup

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: <20151102154121.GB3036@ketchup.mtl.sfl>
Date:	Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:41:23 -0500
From:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To:	Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] net: dsa: mv88e6060: cleanup and fix
 setup

Hi Neil,

On Nov. Monday 02 (45) 11:57 AM, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> This patchset introduces somes fixes and a registers addressing cleanup for
> the mv88e6060 DSA driver.
> 
> The first patch removes the poll_link as mv88e6xxx.
> The 3 following patchs fixes the setup in regards of the datasheet.
> The 2 last patches introduces a clean header and replaces all magic values.
> 
> Neil Armstrong (6):
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: remove poll_link callback
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: use the correct InitReady bit
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: use the correct MaxFrameSize bit
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: use the correct bit shift for mac0
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: add register defines header file
>   net: dsa: mv88e6060: replace magic values with register defines

Nice cleanup. I'll just be a bit picky here, so you may not consider my
comment for this patchset, but maybe for the future ones. Unless I'm
mistaken, there is no reason to group all these patches together.

The first 4 patches are independent fixes, and thus could have been sent
separately to netdev -net.

Then the last 2 ones could have been squashed together, because I don't
see a real value to seperate them since you duplicate some defines, e.g.
REG_PORT. And this patch would be a candidate for netdev -net-next.

Thanks,
-v
--
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/