netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] net: dsa: microchip: add KSZ9896 switch 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:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 00:25:03 +0200
From:   Romain Naour <romain.naour@...le.fr>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk, pabeni@...hat.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, vivien.didelot@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, woojung.huh@...rochip.com,
        Romain Naour <romain.naour@....com>,
        Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] net: dsa: microchip: add KSZ9896 switch support

Hi Vladimir,

Le 31/08/2022 à 17:51, Vladimir Oltean a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 05:43:27PM +0200, Romain Naour wrote:
>> The patch was runtime tested on a 6.0-rc2 kernel and a second time on a 6.0-rc3
>> kernel but not on net-next.
>>
>> Is it ok with rc releases or do I need to test on net-next too?
> 
> The kernel development process is that you normally test a patch on the
> git tree on which it is to be eventually applied.
> 
> The net-next.git tree is periodically (weekly) merged with the 6.0
> release candidates where bug fixes land, but it contains newly developed
> material intended for the 6.1 release candidates (hence the "next" name).

The gap between the kernel 6.0 and the kernel vendor (5.10) used initially is
huge. Initially the 6.0 kernel didn't boot at all on the custom board I'm using
with the KSZ9896. The 6.0-rc2 kernel seemed bleeding-edge enough for upstream.

> 
> If you keep formatting development patches against the plain 6.0 release
> candidates, you may eventually run into a conflict with some other new
> development, and you may never even know.

Actually there was no conflict until the merge of the series "net: dsa:
microchip: add error handling and register access validation"

At least I need to add the .gbit_capable entry in ksz_switch_chips[].

I'm not sure about the new register validation for KSZ9896.

Best regards,
Romain