netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add MV88E6352 DT compatible

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a7b2288c-9b1d-933a-d81f-1b2157984e5a@denx.de>
Date:   Wed, 12 Sep 2018 15:35:14 +0200
From:   Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add MV88E6352 DT compatible

On 09/12/2018 03:32 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> But the DT should correctly describe the hardware, if it doesn't, it's
>> just broken.
> 
> It is more subtle than that. It can be broken, yet work, because it
> contains information which we don't use. I really expect there will be
> cut/paste errors, meaning the more specific compatible is sometimes
> wrong.

If your DT is bogus, nothing can be done about that.

> But since at the moment we don't use it, such a broken DT blob
> will work. Until the day we need to make use of the more specific
> compatible because there really is broken silicon. At that point, we
> introduce a regression. All the devices with broke, yet up until now
> working DT blobs, stop working. Are you really going to argue they
> where always broken, so we don't care we introduced a regression?

If the DT is broken, it's already a bug and we cannot do anything about
that but maybe fix the DT somehow.

> Anyway, this is just rehasing an old discussion. Please go read the
> archive. See if you have anything new to add which was not discussed
> before.

Hehe, I've seen those discussions before too.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut