netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v6 4/4] net: dp83869: Add RGMII internal delay 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 4 Jun 2020 09:48:29 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
Cc:     <andrew@...n.ch>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <robh@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 4/4] net: dp83869: Add RGMII internal delay
 configuration

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 11:38:14 -0500 Dan Murphy wrote:
> Jakub
> 
> On 6/4/20 11:25 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 06:14:10 -0500 Dan Murphy wrote:  
> >> Add RGMII internal delay configuration for Rx and Tx.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>  
> > Hi Dan, please make sure W=1 C=1 build is clean:
> >
> > drivers/net/phy/dp83869.c:103:18: warning: â€˜dp83869_internal_delayâ€™ defined but not used [-Wunused-const-variable=]
> >    103 | static const int dp83869_internal_delay[] = {250, 500, 750, 1000, 1250, 1500,
> >        |                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  
> 
> I built with W=1 and C=1 and did not see this warning.
> 
> What defconfig are you using?

allmodconfig with gcc-10

> Can you check if CONFIG_OF_MDIO is set or not?  That would be the only 
> way that warning would come up.

Hm. I don't have the config from this particular build but just running
allmodconfig makes it CONFIG_OF_MDIO=m

> > Also net-next is closed right now, you can post RFCs but normal patches
> > should be deferred until after net-next reopens.  
> 
> I know net-next is closed.
> 
> I pinged David M when it was open about what is meant by "new" patches 
> in the net-dev FAQ.  So I figured I would send the patches to see what 
> the response was.
> 
> To me these are not new they are in process patches.  My understand is 
> New is v1 patchesets.
> 
> But now I have the answer.

Oh sorry, I may be wrong in this case, I haven't tracked this series.