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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20221212183652.7wtzgcvtjgwsqwbr@skbuf> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:36:52 +0200 From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> To: Jerry.Ray@...rochip.com Cc: andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, jbe@...gutronix.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 5/6] dsa: lan9303: Determine CPU port based on dsa_switch ptr On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 05:42:01PM +0000, Jerry.Ray@...rochip.com wrote: > > It looks like there is potentially more code to unlock than this simple > > API change, which is something you could look at. > > I understand your point. The LAN9303 is very flexible, supporting an I2C > method for managing the switch and allowing the xMII to operate as either > MAC or PHY. > > The original driver was written targeting the primary configuration most > widely used by our customers. The host CPU has an xMII interface and the > MDIO bus is used for control. Adding in the flexibility to support other > configurations is something I will investigate as I expand the driver to > support LAN9353/LAN9354/LAN9355 devices. Adding the > private->info->supports_mii[] as was done in the ksz drivers is the most > likely approach. I see this as a separate patch series. Would you agree? > > I will hardcode for port 0 at this point rather than looking at CPU port. Yes, I think that would be ok. Thanks for at least not baking in any more assumptions in the driver that already exist.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists