netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] arm64: dts: layerscape: update MAC nodes with PHY information

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 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:   Sat, 3 Oct 2020 04:35:18 +0000
From:   Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] arm64: dts: layerscape: update MAC
 nodes with PHY information

On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 04:13:18PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>
> Date: Sat,  3 Oct 2020 00:07:27 +0300
> 
> > This patch set aims to add the necessary DTS nodes to complete the
> > MAC/PCS/PHY representation on DPAA2 devices. The external MDIO bus nodes
> > and the PHYs found on them are added, along with the PCS MDIO internal
> > buses and their PCS PHYs. Also, links to these PHYs are added from the
> > DPMAC node.
> > 
> > I am resending these via netdev because I am not really sure if Shawn is
> > still able to take them in time for 5.10 since his last activity on the
> > tree has been some time ago.
> > I tested them on linux-next and there are no conflicts.
> > 
> > Changes in v2:
> >  - documented the dpmac node into a new yaml entry
> >  - dropped the '0x' from some unit addresses
> 
> I don't feel comfortable taking such a sizable set of DT changes into
> the networking tree rather than the devicetree or ARM tree(s).
> 
> I know we're fast and more responsive than the other subsystems (by
> several orders of magnitude) but that isn't a reason to bypass the
> correct tree for these changes.
> 
> Thank you.

No problem. At least I cleaned-up the patch set and now it's more or
less ready to go for next time.
Thanks for the feedback!

Ioana