linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bindings: net: stmmac: Add documentation for TSN parameters

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: <e14b8b79-465b-9cf3-4ecc-52de4781d9c0@synopsys.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2017 10:05:17 +0100
From:   Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bindings: net: stmmac: Add documentation for
 TSN parameters

Hi Andrew,

On 26-10-2017 22:56, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> About my patches, what I think would be better now would be to
>> drop the configuration by DT and integrate the remaining
>> configuration, letting the EST parameters be populated by SoC
>> specific wrappers.
> Hi Jose
>
> The problem with SoC specific wrappers is that you are going to have
> to remove them once the real interface is defined. Anybody who uses
> your SoC specific wrappers is going to have to re-write their code,
> when it all gets ripped out.

Yeah, I agree. But what about just merge the implementation and
then construct the interface? I mean just creating the internal
parameters in stmmac and then the configuration functions.

>
> You generally don't add device SoC specific wrappers. Imagine if
> everybody did that. Lots of different ways of doing the same thing.
> My suggesting is to keep your patches out for the moment, waiting for
> generic support to be added.

I think we should take advantage of the fact that this is working
and ready to be merged. Its just HW configuration but maybe it
can serve as momentum for other drivers to also integrate this?

Best Regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu

>
>      Andrew