netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: realtek: add compatible strings for RTL8367RB-VB

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: <20220414014055.m4wbmr7tdz6hsa3m@bang-olufsen.dk>
Date:   Thu, 14 Apr 2022 01:40:55 +0000
From:   Alvin Šipraga <ALSI@...g-olufsen.dk>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@...il.com>,
        "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: realtek: add compatible strings for
 RTL8367RB-VB

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 08:40:54PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > It feels strange to force the user to use "realtek,rtl8365mb" or any
> > other different string that does not match the chip's real name. I
> > would not expect the one writing the DT to know that rtl8367s shares
> > the same family with rtl8365mb and rtl8365mb driver does support
> > rtl8367s. Before writing the rtl8367s driver, I also didn't know the
> > relation between those chips. The common was only to relate rtl8367s
> > (or any other chip model) with the vendor driver rtl8367c. As we don't
> > have a generic family string, I think it is better to add every model
> > variant.
> 
> I will just quote the Marvell mv88e6xxx binding:
> 
> The compatibility string is used only to find an identification register,
> which is at a different MDIO base address in different switch families.
> - "marvell,mv88e6085"   : Switch has base address 0x10. Use with models:
>                           6085, 6095, 6097, 6123, 6131, 6141, 6161, 6165,
>                           6171, 6172, 6175, 6176, 6185, 6240, 6320, 6321,
>                           6341, 6350, 6351, 6352
> - "marvell,mv88e6190"   : Switch has base address 0x00. Use with models:
>                           6190, 6190X, 6191, 6290, 6390, 6390X
> - "marvell,mv88e6250"   : Switch has base address 0x08 or 0x18. Use with model:
>                           6220, 6250
> 
> This has worked well for that driver.

Right, so there's no real reason to add more compatible strings as long as the
DT bindings are clear about it. Luiz, if you think the DT bindings are somehow
unclear, feel free to update them. But I think we are probably better off not
adding any more compatible strings unless there is a real technical need for it.

In the same way, I guess the recently added compatible string "realtek,rtl8367s"
was actually unnecessary.

Kind regards,
Alvin