netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] ethtool: provide UAPI for PHY master/slave configuration.

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, 30 Apr 2020 16:24:19 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        mkl@...gutronix.de, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Christian Herber <christian.herber@....com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] ethtool: provide UAPI for PHY
 master/slave configuration.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 06:37:51AM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 08:16:14PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 09:53:07AM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Oleksij
> > 
> > Sorry for taking a while to review this. I was busy fixing the FEC
> > driver which i broke :-(
> 
> Not problem.
> Interesting, what is wrong with FEC? We use it a lot.

I broke MDIO transactions, when making them faster. Hopefully fixed.

> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h b/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h
> > > index 92f737f101178..eb680e3d6bda5 100644
> > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/ethtool.h
> > > @@ -1666,6 +1666,31 @@ static inline int ethtool_validate_duplex(__u8 duplex)
> > >  	return 0;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static inline int ethtool_validate_master_slave_cfg(__u8 cfg)
> > > +{
> > > +	switch (cfg) {
> > > +	case PORT_MODE_CFG_MASTER_PREFERRED:
> > > +	case PORT_MODE_CFG_SLAVE_PREFERRED:
> > > +	case PORT_MODE_CFG_MASTER_FORCE:
> > > +	case PORT_MODE_CFG_SLAVE_FORCE:
> > > +	case PORT_MODE_CFG_UNKNOWN:
> > > +		return 1;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	return 0;
> > > +}
> > 
> > Does this need to be an inline function? 
> 
> Yes, otherwise we get a lot of "defined but not used " warnings.

Sorry, was not clear enough. I think there is only one user of this
function? Why not put it in the same compilation unit, as a normal
static function?

	Andrew