linux-kernel - Re: [Patch net-next v2 0/9] net: dsa: microchip: add support for phylink mac config and link up

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:   Fri, 2 Sep 2022 11:57:07 +0200
From:   Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Arun.Ramadoss@...rochip.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, san@...v.dk, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next v2 0/9] net: dsa: microchip: add support for
 phylink mac config and link up

Hi Vladimir,

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 03:47:37PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 01:27:21PM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > The global register 0x06 responsibilities are bit 4 for 10/100mbps
> > > speed selection, bit 5 for flow control and bit 6  for duplex
> > > operation. Since these three are new features added during refactoring
> > > I overlooked it. 
> > > To fix this, either I need to return from the ksz_set_100_10mbit &
> > > ksz_duplex_flowctrl function if the chip_id is ksz87xx or add
> > > dev->dev_ops for this alone.  Kindly suggest on how to proceed.
> > 
> > I would prefer to got ops way, to clean things up.
> 
> I can't say that that one approach is better or worse than the other.
> Indirect function calls are going to be more expensive than conditionals
> on dev->chip_id, but we aren't in a fast path here, so it doesn't matter
> too much.
> 
> Having indirect function calls will in theory help simplify the logic of
> the main function, but will require good forethought for what constitutes
> an atom of functionality, in a high enough level such as to abstract
> switch differences. Whereas conditionals don't require thinking that far,
> you put them where you need them.
> 
> Also, indirect function calls will move the bloat somewhere else. I have
> seen complaints in the past about the mv88e6xxx driver's layered structure,
> making it difficult to see exactly what gets done for a certain chip.
> 
> It is probable that we don't want to mix these styles too much within a
> single driver, so if work has already started towards dev_ops for
> everything, then dev_ops be it, I guess.
> 
> Oleksij, are you going to submit patches with your proposal?

I have send one simple patch for net to make it work. After this
one will pop-up in then net-next i'll send other patches depending on
this patch.

Regards,
Oleksij
-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |