netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v7 1/6] Documentation: ACPI: DSD: Document MDIO PHY

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]

Message-ID: <20200728205914.GV1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 28 Jul 2020 21:59:14 +0100
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
        Calvin Johnson <calvin.johnson@....nxp.com>,
        Jon <jon@...id-run.com>,
        Cristi Sovaiala <cristian.sovaiala@....com>,
        Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@....nxp.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux.cj@...il.com,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        Vikas Singh <vikas.singh@...esoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v7 1/6] Documentation: ACPI: DSD: Document MDIO
 PHY

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 10:34:37PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Everybody
> 
> So i think it is time to try to bring this discussion to some sort of
> conclusion.
> 
> No ACPI maintainer is willing to ACK any of these patches. Nor are
> they willing to NACK them. ACPI maintainers simply don't want to get
> involved in making use of ACPI in networking.
> 
> I personally don't have the knowledge to do ACPI correctly, review
> patches, point people in the right direction. I suspect the same can
> be said for the other PHY maintainers.
> 
> Having said that, there is clearly a wish from vendors to make use of
> ACPI in the networking subsystem to describe hardware.
> 
> How do we go forward?
> 
> For the moment, we will need to NACK all patches adding ACPI support
> to the PHY subsystem.
> 
> Vendors who really do want to use ACPI, not device tree, probably
> need to get involved in standardisation. Vendors need to submit a
> proposal to UEFI and get it accepted.
> 
> Developers should try to engage with the ACPI maintainers and see
> if they can get them involved in networking. Patches with an
> Acked-by from an ACPI maintainer will be accepted, assuming they
> fulfil all the other usual requirements. But please don't submit
> patches until you do have an ACPI maintainer on board. We don't
> want to spamming the lists with NACKs all the time.

For the record, this statement reflects my position as well (as one
of the named phylib maintainers).  Thanks Andrew.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!