linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: Enable GSWIP_MII_CFG

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: <20210104135237.064fba8e@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Mon, 4 Jan 2021 13:52:37 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, vivien.didelot@...il.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, olteanv@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: Enable GSWIP_MII_CFG_EN
 also for internal PHYs

On Sun, 3 Jan 2021 03:12:21 +0100 Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 3:09 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 03, 2021 at 02:25:43AM +0100, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:  
> > > Enable GSWIP_MII_CFG_EN also for internal PHYs to make traffic flow.
> > > Without this the PHY link is detected properly and ethtool statistics
> > > for TX are increasing but there's no RX traffic coming in.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 14fceff4771e51 ("net: dsa: Add Lantiq / Intel DSA driver for vrx200")
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org  
> >
> > Hi Martin
> >
> > No need to Cc: stable. David or Jakub will handle the backport to
> > stable.  You should however set the subject to [PATCH net 1/2] and
> > base the patches on the net tree, not net-next.  
> do you recommend re-sending these patches and changing the subject?
> the lantiq_gswip.c driver is identical in -net and -net-next and so
> the patch will apply fine in both cases

Resend is pretty much always a safe bet. But since as you said trees 
are identical at the moment I made an exception applied as is :)

Thanks everyone!