netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: make learning configurable and keep it off while standalone

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220802215336.6bc61114@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 21:53:36 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Brian Hutchinson <b.hutchman@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: make learning configurable and
 keep it off while standalone

On Tue,  2 Aug 2022 03:26:36 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> This is compile-tested only, but the equivalent change was tested by
> Brian on a 5.10 kernel and it worked.
> 
> I'm targeting just the "net" tree here (today 5.19 release candidates),
> but this needs to be fixed separately for net-next and essentially every
> other stable branch, since we will be lacking the port_bridge_flags
> callbacks, and there has been a lot of general refactoring in the
> microchip driver.
> 
> Jakub, I wonder if I should let you do the merge resolution between
> "net" and "net-next", or should I just resend against "net-next" and
> keep this patch as one of the stable backports?

I missed this question, sorry. Let's do the latter.