netdev - Re: [PATCH V2 net-next] net: marvell: prestera: add phylink support

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]

Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 23:52:41 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Oleksandr Mazur <oleksandr.mazur@...ision.eu>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, yevhen.orlov@...ision.eu,
        taras.chornyi@...ision.eu
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next] net: marvell: prestera: add phylink support

On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 09:05:21PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 08:20:13PM +0300, Oleksandr Mazur wrote:
> > For SFP port prestera driver will use kernel
> > phylink infrastucture to configure port mode based on
> > the module that has beed inserted
> > 
> > Co-developed-by: Yevhen Orlov <yevhen.orlov@...ision.eu>
> > Signed-off-by: Yevhen Orlov <yevhen.orlov@...ision.eu>
> > Co-developed-by: Taras Chornyi <taras.chornyi@...ision.eu>
> > Signed-off-by: Taras Chornyi <taras.chornyi@...ision.eu>
> > Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Mazur <oleksandr.mazur@...ision.eu>
> > 
> > PATCH V2:
> >   - fix mistreat of bitfield values as if they were bools.
> >   - remove phylink_config ifdefs.
> >   - remove obsolete phylink pcs / mac callbacks;
> >   - rework mac (/pcs) config to not look for speed / duplex
> >     parameters while link is not yet set up.
> >   - remove unused functions.
> >   - add phylink select cfg to prestera Kconfig.
> 
> I would appreciate answers to my questions, rather than just another
> patch submission. So I'll repeat my question in the hope of an answer:
> 
> First question which applies to everything in this patch is - why make
> phylink conditional for this driver?

Hi Oleksandr

I agree with Russell here. This driver should depend on PHYLINK and
remove all the #ifdefs. We try to avoid this sort of code, it hides
bugs and does not get compile tested very well etc.

You need to give us a good reason if you want to keep the code like this.

    Andrew