linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8540p-ride: Add ethernet nodes

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]

Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:05:26 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
        richardcochran@...il.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bmasney@...hat.com, echanude@...hat.com,
        ncai@...cinc.com, jsuraj@....qualcomm.com, hisunil@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8540p-ride: Add ethernet nodes

Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 14:01:27)
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 12:15:41)
> > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 179 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > index 40db5aa0803c..650cd54f418e 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > @@ -28,6 +28,65 @@ aliases {
> > >         chosen {
> > >                 stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
> > >         };
> > > +
> > > +       mtl_rx_setup: rx-queues-config {
> > 
> > Is there a reason why this isn't a child of an ethernet node?
> > 
> > 
> 
> I debated if it was more appropriate to:
> 
>     1. make a duplicate in each ethernet node (ethernet0/1)
>     2. Put it in one and reference from both
>     3. have it floating around independent like this, similar to what is
>        done in sa8155p-adp.dts[0]
> 
> I chose 3 as it seemed cleanest, but if there's a good argument for a
> different approach I'm all ears!

I wonder if it allows the binding checker to catch bad properties by
having it under the ethernet node? That's the only thing I can think of
that may be improved, but I'll let binding reviewers comment here.