netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next,V2] Add LAN9352 Ethernet 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <90A7E81AE28BAE4CBDDB3B35F187D264402EFB82@CHN-SV-EXMX02.mchp-main.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Feb 2016 21:32:20 +0000
From:	<Bryan.Whitehead@...rochip.com>
To:	<davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<andrew@...n.ch>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next,V2] Add LAN9352 Ethernet Driver

> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 3:53 PM
> >>
> >> I do not think, with all the infrastructure we have, that we should
> >> accept pure ethernet drivers for such devices any more.
> >>
> >> About year ago I would have responded differently, but these days all
> >> of the necessary support and infrastructure is there, and reasonable
> >> easy for driver authors to use.
> >
> > I believe I can make the physical phys accessible through ethertool. Would
> that be reasonable?
> 
> No, we are asking you to implement DSA or switchdev support.

I just spoke with my manager, and we would like to change the target device from LAN9352 to LAN9250. The LAN9250 is the same as the LAN9352 but without the switch. It has one mac and one phy. 

Since there is no switch in that product, will that make a pure Ethernet driver easier to accept?