netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek-smi: remove unsupported switches

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: <CACRpkdYxrKnbPAbA9dY4e7pe4dEPNBNCKw2TO6w0UgCOi4UZjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 19 Dec 2021 23:27:59 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        olteanv@...il.com,
        Alvin Šipraga <ALSI@...g-olufsen.dk>,
        Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek-smi: remove
 unsupported switches

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 7:12 AM Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
<luizluca@...il.com> wrote:

> However, it also gives the users a false expectative that it is
> supported (it has happened to me a couple of times). I would not like
> to simply drop this. How about adding a "(not supported)" comment.
> Would it be acceptable?

I don't see why users would get that idea. If they do not know
the difference between device tree bindings and operating system
implementations, I don't know how to fix that. Probably they simply
have to ask and get the answer like with any other technical
detail.

Yours,
Linus Walleij