linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: mt7622: fix switch probe on bananapi-r64

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 10:44:54 +0300
From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
 Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, frank-w@...lic-files.de,
 Frank Wunderlich <linux@...web.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: mt7622: fix switch probe on bananapi-r64

On 01/07/2024 09:16, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> [CCing the other net maintainers]
> 
> On 25.06.24 10:51, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>> Il 25/06/24 07:56, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) ha
>> scritto:
>>> On 17.06.24 13:08, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>>> On 17/06/2024 11:33, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
>>>> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>> It looks more and more like we are stuck here (or was there progress and
>>> I just missed it?) while the 6.10 final is slowly getting closer. Hence:
>>>
>>> AngeloGioacchino, should we ask the net maintainers to revert
>>> 868ff5f4944aa9 ("net: dsa: mt7530-mdio: read PHY address of switch from
>>> device tree") for now to resolve this regression? Reminder, there is
>>> nothing wrong with that commit per se afaik, it just exposes a problem
>>> that needs to be fixed first before it can be reapplied.
>>
>> To be clear on this: I asked for the commit to be fixed such that it
>> guarantees
>> backwards compatibility with older device trees.
>>
>> If no fix comes,
> 
> I haven't see any since that mail, did you? If not, I think...
> 
>> then I guess that we should ask them to revert this commit
>> until a fix is available.
> 
> ...it's time to ask them for the revert to resolve this for -rc7 (and
> avoid a last minute revert), or what do you think?

This is quite frustrating. I absolutely won't consent to a revert. I've
spent a great amount of time and effort explaining why this is neither
necessary nor a good approach in this email thread. I'm not going to accept
a revert due to the other side's failure to communicate, which will create
unnecessary work for me to do. It is ridiculous to demand a change in a
Linux driver before accepting a device tree patch.

Arınç