netdev - Re: [net-next V2 11/14] ethtool: Add support for low latency RS FEC

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:   Mon, 27 Jan 2020 21:56:22 +0000
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To:     "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Aya Levin <ayal@...lanox.com>,
        "mkubecek@...e.cz" <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        "linux@...linux.org.uk" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next V2 11/14] ethtool: Add support for low latency RS FEC

On Sat, 2020-01-25 at 22:05 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 11:40:37AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 05:11:52 +0000, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > From: Aya Levin <ayal@...lanox.com>
> > > 
> > > Add support for low latency Reed Solomon FEC as LLRS.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Aya Levin <ayal@...lanox.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
> > 
> > This is kind of buried in the midst of the driver patches.
> > It'd preferably be a small series of its own. 
> > Let's at least try to CC PHY folk now.
> 
> Thanks Jakuv
> 

I actually CCed PHY on V1 .. but forgot on V2 :(.

Anyway the BIT is very clear and standard as Aya pointed out.. 

Shall I resubmit with the update commit message ?

I see the series is marked as "Not Applicable" i don't know why though
.. 

> > Is this from some standard?
> 
> A reference would be good.
> 
> I assume the existing ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_FEC_RS_BIT is for Clause 91.
> What clause does this LLRS refer to?
> 
> Thanks
> 	Andrew