netdev - Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: qca8k: code split for qca8k

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:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 20:02:57 +0200
From:   Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: qca8k: code split for qca8k

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:15:59PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 07:23:35PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > Ok, so I have to keep the qca8k special function. Is it a problem if I
> > keep the function and than later make the conversion when we have the
> > regmap dependency merged?
> 
> You mean to ask whether there's any problem if the common qca8k_fdb_read()
> calls the specific qca8k_bulk_read as opposed to regmap_bulk_read()?
> 
> Well, no, considering that you don't yet support the switch with the
> MMIO regmap, the common code is still "common" for the single switch
> that the driver supports. You should be able to continue making progress
> with qca8k_bulk_read() being called from common code (as long as you
> leave a TODO comment or something, that it doesn't really belong there).

Ok I will leave a TODO comment and switch to the new implemenation when
the regmap implementation will be available. Thanks for the
clarification on how to proceed.

-- 
	Ansuel