netdev - Re: secondary CPU port facing switch does not come up/online

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 22 Jun 2020 13:23:00 +0000
From:   ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠ <vtol@....net>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Marek Behun <marek.behun@....cz>
Subject: Re: secondary CPU port facing switch does not come up/online


On 22/06/2020 13:06, Marek Behun wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 12:58:00 +0000
> ѽ҉ᶬḳ℠ <vtol@....net> wrote:
>
>> Thank you for the input and pointer to patches.
>>
>> The problem is that it would require TOS deployed on the device, which
>> is not the case and the repo being twice removed from the kernel source
>> -> OpenWrt -> TOS, patches are neither available in mainline or OpenWrt
>> whilst the Marvell SoC chipset is not unique to the CZ.NIC manufactured
>> devices but leveraged by other vendors as well.
>>
>> It seems a bit strange to be nudged to the deployment of a particular
>> repo, unless self-compiling kernel with those patch sets, instead of the
>> same functionality being provided straight from mainline. Are those
>> patch sets being introduced to mainline?
> Hi,
>
> I sent a RFC patch series last year adding multiCPU DSA to upstream
> kernel, but the problem is a rather complicated.

Tracked those on the ML but did not understand why they fizzled into 
nothing, least it did not look like that patches been outright rejected. 
But that is perhaps where "complicated" comes in...

> I plan to try again,
> but do not know when.

If time is an issue I suppose it would not just do if I picked up those 
patches and submit those on your behalf to mainline since it likely 
would require follow up on a code discussion which is beyond realm.

>
> As for OpenWRT - yes, we will try to add full support for Omnia into
> upstream OpenWRT sometime soon. We were waiting for some other
> patches to be accepted in upstream kernel.
>
> Marek

Will have to wait then and see how that goes. Though it would certainly 
benefit all device owners with such chip design if mainline would cater 
for it instead of the various downstream having to patch their end.


Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xF4F735931F05C5CE.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3112 bytes)

Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (841 bytes)