netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: octeon: avoid needless device allocation

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:   Sat, 15 Apr 2023 02:21:24 +0200
From:   Ladislav Michl <oss-lists@...ops.cz>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
        David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
        "Steven J. Hill" <sjhill@...litydiluted.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: octeon: avoid needless device allocation

+David Daney, Steven J. Hill

On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 07:20:08PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > I was asking this question myself and then came to this:
> > Converting driver to phylink makes separating different macs easier as
> > this driver is splitted between staging and arch/mips/cavium-octeon/executive/
> > However I'll provide changes spotted previously as separate preparational
> > patches. Would that work for you?
> 
> Is you end goal to get this out of staging? phylib vs phylink is not a
> reason to keep it in staging.

A side question here: Once upon the time there was an "Cavium OCTEON-III
network driver" patchset floating around, reached v9, at least that's
the last one I was able to find [1]. Prerequisites were intended to go
via linux-mips tree [2].

I was unable to find any further traces and this driver is not even
in Cavium's 5.4 vendor tree. What happened with that? It is for different
hardware, but some design decisions might be interesting here as well.

> It just seems odd to be adding new features to a staging driver. As a
> bit of a "carrot and stick" maybe we should say you cannot add new
> features until it is ready to move out of staging?
> 
> But staging is not my usual domain.
> 
> 	 Andrew

[1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg498700.html
[2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg498696.html