netdev - Re: i.MX6S/DL and QCA8334 switch using DSA 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f119ce88-30b0-854f-1af4-8a6d9cfdcbb5@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 May 2018 15:32:00 +0200
From:   Michal Vokáč <vokac.m@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
Subject: Re: i.MX6S/DL and QCA8334 switch using DSA driver - CPU port not
 working

On 16.5.2018 15:17, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> So as the fixed-link subnode is optional we still should force some sensible
>> defaults if it is not used. Same as Marvell drives does. Can I say that we
>> agreed that the current CPU port setting is not correct and the fastest link
>> speed and duplex supported by the chip should be set as a default?
> 
> That is a sensible default.

OK.

>>> As far as people using this driver, John submitted it, but we have not
>>> see many fixes/enhancements, so I am not clear who is actually using it
>>> these days... glad you are though!
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> To the compatibility of the driver with the QCA8334 that I use. I am not sure
>> what should be the correct way to deal with that. For example Marvell binding
>> uses only two compatible strings for a large range of chips in one family.
>> While Broadcom has one compatible string for each chip.
> 
> With the Marvell devices, there is an ID register which tells you the
> model. The compatible string tells us the information we need in order
> to find that ID register. Once we know the ID, we have all the
> information we need, so don't need a more specific compatible string.
> 
>> As I mentioned earlier
>> in this thread the QCA8334 switch has four ports while the already supported
>> QCA8337 has seven ports. That is the only difference. Register address space
>> is the same.
> 
> Can you identify the exact model using some ID register? If yes, than
> the existing compatible string is sufficient. If no, you need an
> additional compatible string.

Nope. Device ID is the same for the whole family so we need a new compatible.
--	
Michal