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: <2be2af5e-d117-fa2c-f960-e7f0c3ca3d0b@conchuod.ie> Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 19:17:54 +0100 From: Conor Dooley <mail@...chuod.ie> To: Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com Cc: justinpopo6@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, florian.fainelli@...adcom.com, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, opendmb@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, richardcochran@...il.com, sumit.semwal@...aro.org, christian.koenig@....com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/6] dt-bindings: net: brcm,unimac-mdio: Add asp-v2.0 On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 02:19:39PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote: > The ASP 2.0 Ethernet controller uses a brcm unimac. > > Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com> > Signed-off-by: Justin Chen <justin.chen@...adcom.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.yaml | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.yaml > index 0be426ee1e44..6684810fcbf0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/brcm,unimac-mdio.yaml > @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ properties: > - brcm,genet-mdio-v3 > - brcm,genet-mdio-v4 > - brcm,genet-mdio-v5 > + - brcm,asp-v2.0-mdio > + - brcm,asp-v2.1-mdio > - brcm,unimac-mdio From V(N-1), there was some discussion between Rob & Florian: > > How many SoCs does each of these correspond to? SoC specific compatibles > > are preferred to version numbers (because few vendors are disciplined > > at versioning and also not changing versions with every Soc). > > So far there is a 1:1 mapping between the number of versions and the > number of SoCs, and the older SoC uses v2.0, while the newer one uses v2.1. Rob's not around right now, but I don't really get why if there is a 1:1 mapping you don't just name these things after the SoCs? Also, my mailer **refused** to let me reply to you because of something to do with a garbage S/MIME signature? Dunno wtf is happening there. Cheers, Conor.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists