netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: sfp: small improvements

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

Date:   Mon, 21 May 2018 11:51:15 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     antoine.tenart@...tlin.com
Cc:     linux@...linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
        maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, gregory.clement@...tlin.com,
        miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, nadavh@...vell.com, stefanc@...vell.com,
        ymarkman@...vell.com, mw@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: sfp: small improvements

From: Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 10:29:05 +0200

> This series was part of the mvpp2 phylink one but as we reworked it to
> use fixed-link on the DB boards, the SFP commits weren't needed
> anymore for our use case. Two of the three patches still are needed I
> believe (I ditched the one about non-wired SFP cages), so they are sent
> here in a separate series.

Based upon the discussion of patch #1, it seems there is a desire to make
the i2c-bus property mandatory since it isn't clear if access to the SFP
module without it really all that doable.