netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 6/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: fully support SERDES on Topaz family

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]

Message-ID: <20190826195222.3f9e3f51@nic.cz>
Date:   Mon, 26 Aug 2019 19:52:22 +0200
From:   Marek Behun <marek.behun@....cz>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 6/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: fully support
 SERDES on Topaz family

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 13:44:18 -0400
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com> wrote:

> > It can be done once at probe. At first I thought about doing this in
> > setup_errata, but this is not an erratum. So shall I create a new
> > method for this in chip operations structure? Something like
> > port_additional_setup() ?  
> 
> No. Those "setup" or "config" functions are likely to do everything and
> become a mess, thus unmaintainable. Operations must be specific.

What about Andrew's complaint, then, abouth the two additional
parameters?