linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: mtk_eth_soc: add label support for GMACs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 5 Apr 2022 20:15:36 +0300
From:   Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Mark Lee <Mark-MC.Lee@...iatek.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: mtk_eth_soc: add label support for GMACs

On 04/04/2022 15:22, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 02:40:00PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>> From: René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>
>>
>> Add label support for GMACs. The network interface of the GMAC will have
>> the string of the label property defined on the devicetree as its name.
> 
> Sorry, but no. This has been discussed a few times, you need something
> in user space, udev or systemd etc to set interface names.
> 
> Please look back in the archive at previous discussions.

Thanks for the heads up Andrew, I found your quote from 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/Ydhwfa%2FECqTE3rLx@lunn.ch/:

> I agree with Russell here. I doubt this is going to be accepted.
> 
> DSA is special because DSA is very old, much older than DT, and maybe
> older than udev. The old DSA platform drivers had a mechanism to
> supply the interface name to the DSA core. When we added a DT binding
> to DSA we kept that mechanism, since that mechanism had been used for
> a long time.
> 
> Even if you could show there was a generic old mechanism, from before
> the days of DT, that allowed interface names to be set from platform
> drivers, i doubt it would be accepted because there is no continuity,
> which DSA has.

On MT7621 SoC, we can mux a switch phy of MT7530 (must be phy0 or 4) to 
the SoC's gmac1. So a UTP port connected to that phy becomes directly 
connected to the SoC's gmac1. Because of that, I wanted to be able to 
give the gmac's netdev interface a name from DT like DSA. However, the 
quote above makes sense why not to do so.

Thanks.
Arınç