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

Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 15:26:16 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Romain Naour <romain.naour@...le.fr>
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

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 12:25:03AM +0200, Romain Naour wrote:
> 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 don't plan to remain forever on a BSP based on 5.10, this is why
it is preferable to have the changes required for your platform to work
submitted upstream. It should make uprevs easier, and when there are
breakages, git bisect is at your disposal.

> > 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.

So there's another reason to retest on net-next.