netdev - Re: [RFC] EEPROM dumping/changing code for r8169 driver

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]

Message-ID: <1374437533.2804.71.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 21 Jul 2013 21:12:13 +0100
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Peter Wu <lekensteyn@...il.com>
CC:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Realtek linux nic maintainers" <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] EEPROM dumping/changing code for r8169 driver

On Sun, 2013-07-21 at 18:27 +0200, Peter Wu wrote:
> On Sunday 21 July 2013 17:01:54 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 11:48 +0200, Peter Wu wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > As noted in another mail, I have been working on adding EEPROM reading
> > > writing support for the r8169 driver. The below diff adds basic support,
> > > but it
> > > is not completely finished yet:
> > [...]
> > 
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/Kconfig
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/Kconfig
> > > @@ -112,4 +112,13 @@ config R8169
> > > 
> > >  	  To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the module
> > >  	  will be called r8169.  This is recommended.
> > > 
> > > +config R8169_93CX6
> > > +	bool "Realtek 8169 external 93CX6 EEPROM support"
> > > +	depends on R8169
> > > +	select EEPROM_93CX6
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > This select is wrong as it will cause EEPROM_93CX6=y even if R8169=m.
> > But why make this an option at all?
> For this, I got inspiration from drivers/ethernet/8390/Kconfig which had an
> AX88796_93CX6 option. Reading EEPROM is currently not a critical piece of
> functionality, so I decided to make this optional.

Most ethtool operations are not critical, but it costs very little to
implement them unconditionally (and config options increase the
maintenance burden).

> There seem also to be newer
> hardware that use a two-wired serial interface for accessing EEPROM instead of
> 93C46/93C56/93C66. Would you suggest always including this code (distro
> kernels should typically enable this) or making it optional?
[...]

Always include it.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html