netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: mediatek: Add MT7628/88 SoC support

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: <9bbc449b-bff2-448a-6b95-cc712c9353b8@denx.de>
Date:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 11:08:05 +0200
From:   Stefan Roese <sr@...x.de>
To:     René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>,
        Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ethernet: mediatek: Add MT7628/88 SoC support

Hi Rene,

On 14.08.19 15:08, René van Dorst wrote:
> Quoting Stefan Roese <sr@...x.de>:
> 
>> Hi Rene,
>>
>> On 14.08.19 11:26, René van Dorst wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>> Great, Thanks for addressing this issue.
>>>
>>> I hope we can collaborate to also support mt76x8 in my PHYLINK
>>> patches [0][1].
>>> I am close to posting V2 of the patches but I am currently waiting on some
>>> fiber modules to test the changes better.
>>
>> I do have a "hackish" DSA driver for the integrated switch (ESW) in my
>> tree. If time permits, I'll work on upstreaming this one as well. And
>> yes, hopefully we can collaborate on your PHYLINK work too.
> 
> It is not only the switch driver but also the Mediatek ethernet driver that is
> converted to PHYLINK. So we have a conflict in each others work.

Yes, I am aware of this.
  
> I don't no what the right way is to go but I was thinking about 2 options
> 
> 1. Lets say your work goes in first. I rebase my patches on your changes.
>      We collaborate to create an extra PHYLINK patch ontop of my work
> for your SOC.
> 2. My patches goes in first and you adapt your patches to that.
> 
> What do you think?

It really depends on the timing, when the patches arrive in the kernel
(net-next). If yours makes it first, I'll rebase my patch on top of
your work. Otherwise you will need to rebase yours.
  
> I have latest changes here [0].
> 
> Also my modules did arrive so I can test my changes.

Thanks,
Stefan