netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: phy: add core phylib sfp 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 11 Nov 2019 09:01:22 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: phy: add core phylib sfp support

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 8:01 AM Russell King - ARM Linux admin
<linux@...linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 06:00:40PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 04:40:07PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 05:13:07PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 02:23:05PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > > > > Add core phylib help for supporting SFP sockets on PHYs.  This provides
> > > > > a mechanism to inform the SFP layer about PHY up/down events, and also
> > > > > unregister the SFP bus when the PHY is going away.
> > > >
> > > > Hi Russell
> > > >
> > > > What does the device tree binding look like? I think you have SFP
> > > > proprieties in the PHYs node?
> > >
> > > Correct, just the same as network devices.  Hmm, however, neither are
> > > documented... oh dear, it looks like I need to figure out how this
> > > yaml stuff works. :(
> >
> > Yes, that would be good. I also assume you have at least one DT patch
> > for one of the Marvell boards? Seeing that would also help.
>
> So, how does one make sure that the .yaml files are correct?
>
> The obvious thing is to use the "dtbs_check" target, described by
> Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.md, but that's far from
> trivial.

'dt_binding_check' will check just the bindings. 'dtbs_check' is
pretty slow given we have so many dts files and it generates lots of
warnings.

> First it complained about lack of libyaml development, which is easy
> to solve.  Having given it that, "dtbs_check" now complains:
>
> /bin/sh: 1: dt-doc-validate: not found
> /bin/sh: 1: dt-mk-schema: not foundmake[2]: ***
> [...Documentation/devicetree/bindings/Makefile:12:
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.example.dts] Error 127
>
> (spot the lack of newline character - which is obviously an entirely
> different problem...)
>
> # apt search dt-doc-validate
> Sorting... Done
> Full Text Search... Done
> # apt search dt-mk-schema
> Sorting... Done
> Full Text Search... Done
>
> Searching google, it appears it needs another git repository
> (https://github.com/robherring/dt-schema/) from Rob Herring to use
> this stuff, which is totally undocumented in the kernel tree.

The dependencies are all documented in writing-schema.rst (formerly
.md) in the 'Dependencies' section.

TL;DR: pip3 install git+https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema.git@master


Rob