linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v11 3/9] dt-bindings: net: dsa: Document support for Airoha AN8855 DSA Switch

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: <20241210221602.ohyzlic2x3pflmrg@skbuf>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:16:02 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	upstream@...oha.com
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v11 3/9] dt-bindings: net: dsa: Document support
 for Airoha AN8855 DSA Switch

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 09:59:04PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > +  airoha,ext-surge:
> > > +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
> > > +    description:
> > > +      Calibrate the internal PHY with the calibration values stored in EFUSE
> > > +      for the r50Ohm values.
> > 
> > Doesn't seem that this pertains to the switch.
> 
> Do you think this should be placed in each PHY node?

Logically speaking, that's where it belongs.

> I wanted to prevent having to define a schema also for PHY if possible
> given how integrated these are. (originally it was defined in DT node
> to follow how it was done in Airoha SDK)

Does compatibility with the Airoha SDK dt-bindings matter in any way?