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, 26 Sep 2022 10:55:59 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Gerhard Engleder <gerhard@...leder-embedded.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/6] dt-bindings: net: tsnep: Allow
 dma-coherent

On 25/09/2022 10:14, Gerhard Engleder wrote:
> On 25.09.22 09:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 24/09/2022 20:11, Gerhard Engleder wrote:
>>> On 24.09.22 11:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 23/09/2022 22:29, Gerhard Engleder wrote:
>>>>> Fix the following dtbs_check error if dma-coherent is used:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...: 'dma-coherent' does not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
>>>>>   From schema: .../Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/engleder,tsnep.yaml
>>>>
>>>> Skip last line - it's obvious. What instead you miss here - the
>>>> DTS/target which has this warning. I assume that some existing DTS uses
>>>> this property?
>>>
>>> I will skip that line.
>>>
>>> The binding is for an FPGA based Ethernet MAC. I'm working with
>>> an evaluation platform currently. The DTS for the evaluation platform
>>> is mainline, but my derived DTS was not accepted mainline. So there is
>>> no DTS. This is similar for other FPGA based devices.
>>
>> If this is not coming from mainline, then there is no warning...  we are
>> not interested in warnings in out-of-tree code, because we are not
>> fixing them.
> 
> Ok. So I would rewrite the description that it just allows dma-coherent
> and remove the fix/warning stuff. Is that ok?

That would be okay, but please add answer to why you are making this change.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ