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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:06:07 -0800 From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>, Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Philippe Reynes <tremyfr@...il.com>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>, Ingo Tuchscherer <ingo.tuchscherer@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "moderated list:ARM/Marvell Dove/MV78xx0/Orion SOC support" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/8] net: dsa: Add support for platform data On 01/10/2017 12:41 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> @@ -452,11 +455,14 @@ static int dsa_cpu_parse(struct dsa_port *port, u32 index, >> struct net_device *ethernet_dev; >> struct device_node *ethernet; >> >> - ethernet = of_parse_phandle(port->dn, "ethernet", 0); >> - if (!ethernet) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + if (port->dn) { >> + ethernet = of_parse_phandle(port->dn, "ethernet", 0); >> + if (!ethernet) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + ethernet_dev = of_find_net_device_by_node(ethernet); >> + } else >> + ethernet_dev = dev_to_net_device(dst->pd->netdev); Bonjour Andrew, > > Hi Florian > > This is not going to work with John's rework of my multi CPU ports > code. I think you are going to have to modify the platform_data > structure to support multi-CPU ports. Last time we discussed this, I had a super complex dsa2_platform_data that allowed you to do exactly the same thing we currently do with Device Tree, except that this was with platform_data. It took a lot of effort to get there, but I essentially had the ZII vf160 board example re-implemented and verified with a mockup driver (still have it in a branch that's not too far from net-next/master). Your reply then AFAIR was that we should aim for something simpler and here is the result, we end-up re-using the existing dsa_platform_data with its limitations. If we have legacy platforms with complex setups, I really don't think we have those in tree, we should use dsa2_platform_data (still have the patches somewhere for that) although I was hoping to not have to use it since it is way more intrusive into net/dsa/dsa2.c. All platforms that I know that will benefit from this patch series: x86 SCU from ZII (out of tree), BCM47xx, BCM63xx, Orion5x have the same properties: single switch attached to a SPI/MDIO/MMAP with built-in PHYs. If we have more complex setups than that, we should try to collect the requirements. > > I put higher priority on cleanly integrating multi-CPU ports using > device tree, than supporting legacy platforms. I'm O.K. with > preparatory patches, but i think we should wait for actually platform > data changes until after Johns code has landed and we can design the > platform_data to work with it. I would very much like to see the patches and then make a decision based on the submission rather than project a decision on code that has not been submitted yet. Do we agree that patches 1 through 5 and 7 could go in then? -- Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists