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: <ZByZl181eQZ24nwd@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 18:25:27 +0000
From:   "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 6/7] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: provide software
 node for default settings

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 07:17:27PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > So, given that this is only supposed to be used for mv88e6xxx because
> > of it's legacy, maybe the check in dsa_port_phylink_create() should
> > be:
> > 
> >         fwnode = of_fwnode_handle(dp->dn);
> >         if (fwnode && ds->ops->port_get_fwnode) {
> > 
> > In other words, we only allow the replacement of the firmware
> > description if one already existed.
> 
> That sounds reasonable.
> 
> > Alternatively, we could use:
> > 
> > 	if (!dsa_port_is_user(dp) && ds->ops->port_get_fwnode) {
> > 
> > since mv88e6xxx today only does this "max speed" thing for CPU and
> > DSA ports, and thus we only need to replace the firmware description
> > for these ports - and we can document that port_get_fwnode is only
> > for CPU and DSA ports.
> 
> Also reasonable.
> 
> The first seems better for the Non-DT, where as the second makes it
> clear it is supposed to be for CPU and DSA ports only.
> 
> Is it over the top to combine them?

To be clear, you're suggesting:

	if (!dsa_port_is_user(dp) && fwnode && ds->ops->port_get_fwnode) {

?

If so, yes - you know better than I how these bits are supposed to work.
Thanks.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ