netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/6] net: cpmac: remove driver to prepare for platform removal

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: <20231005071634.581fa8c2@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 07:16:34 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
 linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@...il.com>, Florian
 Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/6] net: cpmac: remove driver to prepare
 for platform removal

On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 16:08:55 +0200 Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 08:15:26AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > AR7 is going to be removed from the Kernel, so remove its networking
> > support in form of the cpmac driver. This allows us to remove the
> > platform because this driver includes a platform specific header.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
> > Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since v1:
> > * added ack
> > 
> >  MAINTAINERS                      |    6 -
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/ti/Kconfig  |    9 +-
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/ti/Makefile |    1 -
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpmac.c  | 1251 ------------------------------
> >  4 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1266 deletions(-)
> >  delete mode 100644 drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpmac.c
> > [..]  
> 
> is it ok for network people to route this patch via mips-next tree
> or do you want to apply to net-next ?

We have a ".remove callback should return void" conversion from Uwe
queued for the deleted driver (231ea972ccaf5b). The conflict will be
really trivial, but I guess no conflict beats trivial conflict so better
if we take it? :S