netdev - Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] net: macb: cover letter

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]

Date:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:48:51 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Parshuram Raju Thombare <pthombar@...ence.com>
Cc:     "nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com" <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rafal Ciepiela <rafalc@...ence.com>,
        Piotr Sroka <piotrs@...ence.com>,
        Anil Joy Varughese <aniljoy@...ence.com>,
        Arthur Marris <arthurm@...ence.com>,
        Steven Ho <stevenh@...ence.com>,
        Milind Parab <mparab@...ence.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] net: macb: cover letter

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 01:27:58PM +0000, Parshuram Raju Thombare wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> >One thing which was never clear is how you are testing the features you are
> >adding. Please could you describe your test setup and how each new feature
> >is tested using that hardware. I'm particularly interested in what C45 device
> >are you using? But i expect Russell would like to know more about SFP
> >modules you are using. Do you have any which require 1000BaseX,
> >2500BaseX, or provide copper 1G?
> 
> Sorry for late reply.
> Here is a little more information on our setup used for testing C45 patch with a view to
> try clarify a few points. 
> Regarding the MDIO communication channel that our controller supports - We have tested
> MDIO transfers through Clause 22, but none of our local PHY's support Clause 45 so our hardware
> team have created an example Clause 45 slave device for us to add support to the driver.

O.K.

Given Russells reply, i suggest you submit the MDIO Clause 45 patch,
and throw all the other patches away.

    Andrew