netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: keep compatibility with device tree blobs with no phy-mode

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: <20220820112413.ea5abtd2hegpk6kr@skbuf>
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 11:24:14 +0000
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
        "UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        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>,
        Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@...gutronix.de>,
        Oleksij Rempel <linux@...pel-privat.de>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
        Alvin ┼áipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Craig McQueen <craig@...ueen.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dsa: microchip: keep compatibility with device
 tree blobs with no phy-mode

On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 04:32:11PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 17:32:50 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > DSA has multiple ways of specifying a MAC connection to an internal PHY.
> > One requires a DT description like this:
> 
> Too much side-conversations going on here for me to grasp, this is good
> to go in, correct?

Admittedly I'm not an impartial party, but yes please.