linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Octeon: add SNIC10E board

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:   Mon, 23 May 2022 11:17:21 +0200
From:   Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
To:     Stijn Tintel <stijn@...ux-ipv6.be>
Cc:     linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Octeon: add SNIC10E board

On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 07:48:10PM +0300, Stijn Tintel wrote:
> The CN6640-SNIC10E-G and CN6640-SNIC10E-1.1-G PCIe NICs are based on
> this board.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stijn Tintel <stijn@...ux-ipv6.be>
> ---
>  arch/mips/include/asm/octeon/cvmx-bootinfo.h | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/octeon/cvmx-bootinfo.h b/arch/mips/include/asm/octeon/cvmx-bootinfo.h
> index 6c61e0a63924..c1c0b3230e0a 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/include/asm/octeon/cvmx-bootinfo.h
> +++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/octeon/cvmx-bootinfo.h
> @@ -253,6 +253,7 @@ enum cvmx_board_types_enum {
>  	CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_REDWING = 43,
>  	CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_NIC68_4 = 44,
>  	CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_NIC10E_66 = 45,
> +	CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_SNIC10E = 50,
>  	CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_MAX,
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -369,6 +370,7 @@ static inline const char *cvmx_board_type_to_string(enum
>  		ENUM_BRD_TYPE_CASE(CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_REDWING)
>  		ENUM_BRD_TYPE_CASE(CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_NIC68_4)
>  		ENUM_BRD_TYPE_CASE(CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_NIC10E_66)
> +		ENUM_BRD_TYPE_CASE(CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_SNIC10E)
>  		ENUM_BRD_TYPE_CASE(CVMX_BOARD_TYPE_MAX)
>  
>  			/* Customer boards listed here */
> -- 
> 2.35.1

applied to mips-next.

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]