netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] net: dsa: microchip: Add drive strength configuration

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: <35c1c9ee-357f-4ba5-dd47-95d4c064e69b@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 20:38:05 +0200
From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
 Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
 Arun Ramadoss <arun.ramadoss@...rochip.com>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, "Russell King (Oracle)"
 <linux@...linux.org.uk>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] net: dsa: microchip: Add drive strength
 configuration

Le 12/09/2023 à 13:35, Vladimir Oltean a écrit :
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 06:54:59AM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
>> Add device tree based drive strength configuration support. It is needed to
>> pass EMI validation on our hardware.
>>
>> Configuration values are based on the vendor's reference driver.
>>
>> Tested on KSZ9563R.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
>> ---

>> +	if (!found)
>> +		return 0;
> 
> Maybe "have_any_prop" would be a better name to avoid Christophe's confusion?

Not sure it worth it.

Christophe should learn to read code or avoid some quick feed-back 
before morning coffee :)

'found' looks good enough.

CJ