netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: net: qcom: Add binding for shared mdio bus

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:   Thu, 20 Sep 2018 01:33:03 +0000
From:   "Wang, Dongsheng" <dongsheng.wang@...-semitech.com>
To:     Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Zheng, Joey" <yu.zheng@...-semitech.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: net: qcom: Add binding for shared
 mdio bus

On 2018/9/19 22:15, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 9/19/18 7:25 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> ACPI is completely separate and should not affect the DT binding.
>> I've not yet looked at the ACPI changes you added.
> Just FYI, there is no device tree platform on which the upstream EMAC 
> driver works.  All of the DT code in the driver is theoretical.  It 
> worked once on a prototype platform, when I originally wrote the code, 
> but since then DT support is mostly a guess.
>
> The focus of any patches for the EMAC should be ACPI, not DT.  If 
> anything, ACPI support should come first.  No one should be writing or 
> reviewing DT code before ACPI code.
>
> The upstream EMAC driver is only known to work on the QDF2400, which is 
> an ACPI-only chip.  I feel like I've been repeating this too often.
>
Ok, I just focus on ACPI, and keep DT code no changes.

Cheers,
Dongsheng