netdev - PoE support

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230912122655.391e2c86@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 12:26:55 +0200
From: Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, Jakub Kicinski
 <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Petazzoni
 <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: PoE support

Hello,

I am working on the PoE support and I am facing few questioning.
I would like to use the same commands and core as PoDL, but non generic
development raised questions.

The admin_state and admin_control are the same therefore I will use the
ethtool_podl_pse_admin_state enumeration.
The power detection status have few differences, I thought that adding PoE
specific states to ethtool_podl_pse_pw_d_status rather than adding a new
ethtool_pse_pw_d_status enum is the best way to avoid breaking the old API.

I also would like to remove PoDL reference to ethtool but keep
"podl-pse-admin-control" command for old compatibility alongside a new
"pse-admin-control" command.

What do you think? Do you think of a better way?

Köry