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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:46:03 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <>
To: Andrew Lunn <>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <>, Vladimir Oltean <>, 
	"David S. Miller" <>, Eric Dumazet <>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <>, Paolo Abeni <>, 
	Christian Marangi <>, Tim Harvey <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Support LED control

On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 5:13 PM Andrew Lunn <> wrote:

> What i would really like to see happen is that the DSA core handles
> the registration of the LEDs, similar to how phylib does. The DT
> binding should be identical for all DSA devices, so there is no need
> for each driver to do its own parsing.
> There are some WIP patches at
> leds-offload-support-reduced-auto-netdev
> which implement this. Feel free to make use of them.

Oh it's quite a lot of patches, I really cannot drive that because there are
so many things about them that I don't understand the thinking behind...
But I like what I see!

While I defined the bits a bit differently, some of it looks similar enough.

> > +/* Entries are listed in selector order */
> > +static const struct mv88e6xxx_led_hwconfig mv88e6xxx_led_hwconfigs[] = {
> You need to be careful with naming. These are probably specific to the
> 6352. Different switches probably have different capabilities. So it
> would be good to have the names reflect the switch family they are
> valid for.

OK I'll try to name them like such.

> When we come to add support for other switch families, i wounder how
> tables like this scale. Is there some things which can be shared, if
> we break the table up? I need to check the data sheets.

We will see I guess. It falls back to the whole question of whether
supporting all variants in a single module is even scaling. So far
it does I guess? One day the MV88E6xxx may need to be broken
into submodules.

Linus Walleij

Powered by blists - more mailing lists