netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/7] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: drop revision probing

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:	Sat, 16 Apr 2016 01:43:17 +0200
From:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/7] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: drop revision
 probing

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 07:21:23PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> There is no point in having special case for the revision when probing a
> switch model. The code gets cluttered with unnecessary defines, and
> leads to errors when code such as mv88e6131_setup compares
> PORT_SWITCH_ID_6131_B2 to ps->id which mask the revision.
> 
> Drop every revision definitions, add a ps->rev variable for eventual
> runtime checking and lookup only the product number.

You forgot to update the commit message. ps->rev has been removed in
this version.

>  
>  	/* Look up the exact switch ID */

This comment now becomes meaningless. Please delete.

>  	for (i = 0; i < num; ++i)
> -		if (table[i].id == ret)
> +		if (table[i].id == (ret & 0xfff0))
>  			return table[i].name;

			Andrew