[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220323134944.4cn25vs6vaqcdeso@bang-olufsen.dk>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:48:56 +0000
From: Alvin Šipraga <ALSI@...g-olufsen.dk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: Alvin Šipraga <alvin@...s.dk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: realtek: make interface drivers depend
on OF
Hi Andrew,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 01:57:57PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 01:42:25PM +0100, Alvin Šipraga wrote:
> > From: Alvin Šipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>
> >
> > The kernel test robot reported build warnings with a randconfig that
> > built realtek-{smi,mdio} without CONFIG_OF set. Since both interface
> > drivers are using OF and will not probe without, add the corresponding
> > dependency to Kconfig.
> >
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202203231233.Xx73Y40o-lkp@intel.com/
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202203231439.ycl0jg50-lkp@intel.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Alvin Šipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>
>
> Hi Alvin
>
> This looks like something which could go into net, not net-next. Could
> you add a Fixes: tag.
The driver has been split in net-next and deviates significantly from
what is in net. I can send a patch to net as well, but that will not
cover net-next.
View from net:
drivers/net/dsa/Kconfig:
...
config NET_DSA_REALTEK_SMI
...
View from net-next:
drivers/net/dsa/Kconfig:
...
source "drivers/net/dsa/realtek/Kconfig"
...
drivers/net/dsa/realtek/Kconfig:
menuconfig NET_DSA_REALTEK
...
config NET_DSA_REALTEK_MDIO
...
config NET_DSA_REALTEK_SMI
...
I am not well-versed in the procedures here, but since 5.17 has now been
released, isn't it more important to fix 5.18, which will soon have the
net-next branch merged in? Hence the patch should target net-next?
As for 5.17 and the old (net) structure, I can send a separate patch to
net. Does that sound OK?
Once that is clarified I can re-send with a Fixes: tag.
Thanks for your help.
Kind regards,
Alvin
>
> Otherwise
>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
>
> Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists