netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: ethernet-controller: create a type for PHY interface modes

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: <20210324215922.74f64e5f@thinkpad>
Date:   Wed, 24 Mar 2021 21:59:22 +0100
From:   Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, pali@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: ethernet-controller: create a
 type for PHY interface modes

On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 14:07:06 -0600
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 11:35:55AM +0100, Marek Behún wrote:
> > In order to be able to define a property describing an array of PHY
> > interface modes, we need to change the current scalar
> > `phy-connection-type`, which lists the possible PHY interface modes, to
> > an array of length 1 (otherwise we would need to define the same list at
> > two different places).
> > 
> > Moreover Rob Herring says that we cannot reuse the values of a property;
> > we need to $ref a type.
> > 
> > Move the definition of possible PHY interface modes from the
> > `phy-connection-type` property to an array type definition
> > `phy-connection-type-array`, and simply reference this type in the
> > original property.  
> 
> Why not just extend phy-connection-type to support more than 1 entry?

Hmm, that would be even better, although it would complicate the
Russell's marvell10g patches a little if we want the code to be
backward compatible with older device trees.

I will look into this.

Marek