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: <MN2PR11MB4664357BAEC609040CF480C69B749@MN2PR11MB4664.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> Date: Thu, 11 May 2023 07:44:30 +0000 From: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> CC: Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...a.com>, Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "Olech, Milena" <milena.olech@...el.com>, "Michalik, Michal" <michal.michalik@...el.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, poros <poros@...hat.com>, mschmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>, Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v7 1/8] dpll: spec: Add Netlink spec in YAML >From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> >Sent: Friday, May 5, 2023 12:30 PM > >Thu, May 04, 2023 at 11:24:51PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >>On Thu, 4 May 2023 14:02:30 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: > >[...] > >> >>> >+ name: device >>> >+ subset-of: dpll >>> >+ attributes: >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: id >>> >+ type: u32 >>> >+ value: 2 >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: dev-name >>> >+ type: string >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: bus-name >>> >+ type: string >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: mode >>> >+ type: u8 >>> >+ enum: mode >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: mode-supported >>> >+ type: u8 >>> >+ enum: mode >>> >+ multi-attr: true >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: lock-status >>> >+ type: u8 >>> >+ enum: lock-status >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: temp >>> >+ type: s32 >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: clock-id >>> >+ type: u64 >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: type >>> >+ type: u8 >>> >+ enum: type >>> >+ - >>> >+ name: pin-prio >>> >+ type: u32 >>> >+ value: 19 >>> >>> Do you still need to pass values for a subset? That is odd. Well, I >>> think is is odd to pass anything other than names in subset definition, >>> the rest of the info is in the original attribute set definition, >>> isn't it? >>> Jakub? >> >>Probably stale code, related bug was fixed in YNL a few months back. >>Explicit value should no longer be needed. > >What about the rest, like type, enum, multi-attr etc. Are they needed >for subset? If yes, why? > > It seems the name and type is needed. Without type generation scripts fails. For now fixed with having only name/type on subset attributes. Thanks! Arkadiusz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists