linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] dt-bindings: net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: Add missing phy-mode and fixed-link

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: <20240610220531.GA3144440-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:05:31 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Martin Schiller <ms@....tdt.de>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com, hauke@...ke-m.de,
	andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com, olteanv@...il.com,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] dt-bindings: net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: Add
 missing phy-mode and fixed-link

On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 11:07:15AM +0200, Martin Schiller wrote:
> On 2024-06-10 10:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 06/06/2024 10:52, Martin Schiller wrote:
> > > From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
> > > 
> > > The CPU port has to specify a phy-mode and either a phy or a
> > > fixed-link.
> > > Since GSWIP is connected using a SoC internal protocol there's no PHY
> > > involved. Add phy-mode = "internal" and a fixed-link to describe the
> > > communication between the PMAC (Ethernet controller) and GSWIP switch.
> > 
> > You did nothing in the binding to describe them. You only extended
> > example, which does not really matter if there is DTS with it.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> 
> OK, so I'll update subject and commit message to signal that we only
> update the example code.

Either convert it or leave it alone. If you are worried about users' DTs 
being wrong due to copying a bad example, then you should care enough to 
do the conversion. Given the errors we find in examples, it's likely 
not the only problem.

Rob