linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ9893: do not write to not supported Output Clock Control Register

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: <20220729084149.5a061772@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 29 Jul 2022 08:41:49 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ9893: do not write
 to not supported Output Clock Control Register

On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 11:48:40 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 10:23:16PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 15:18:52 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:  
> > > KSZ9893 compatible chips do not have "Output Clock Control Register 0x0103".
> > > So, avoid writing to it.  
> > 
> > Respin will be needed regardless of the answer to Andrew - patch does
> > not apply.  
> 
> Hm, this driver was hardly refactored in net-next. I'll better send it
> against net-next otherwise things will break.

Probably fine either way, with the net-next patch (i.e. this patch) 
on the list we shouldn't have problems resolving the conflict correctly.

The real question is whether it's okay for 5.19 to not have this patch.
It'd be good to have the user-visible impact specified in the commit
message.