netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v15 11/14] net: stmmac: dwmac-loongson: Add DT-less GMAC PCI-device 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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <eb3ad0da-9ed3-42e3-9a96-7be81841fc93@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:32:56 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Yanteng Si <siyanteng@...ngson.cn>, fancer.lancer@...il.com
Cc: Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com, chenhuacai@...nel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
 guyinggang@...ngson.cn, netdev@...r.kernel.org, chris.chenfeiyang@...il.com,
 si.yanteng@...ux.dev, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>,
 peppe.cavallaro@...com, andrew@...n.ch, hkallweit1@...il.com,
 alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, joabreu@...opsys.com, diasyzhang@...cent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v15 11/14] net: stmmac: dwmac-loongson: Add
 DT-less GMAC PCI-device support

On 7/29/24 14:23, Yanteng Si wrote:
> The Loongson GMAC driver currently supports the network controllers
> installed on the LS2K1000 SoC and LS7A1000 chipset, for which the GMAC
> devices are required to be defined in the platform device tree source.
> But Loongson machines may have UEFI (implies ACPI) or PMON/UBOOT
> (implies FDT) as the system bootloaders. In order to have both system
> configurations support let's extend the driver functionality with the
> case of having the Loongson GMAC probed on the PCI bus with no device
> tree node defined for it. That requires to make the device DT-node
> optional, to rely on the IRQ line detected by the PCI core and to
> have the MDIO bus ID calculated using the PCIe Domain+BDF numbers.
> 
> In order to have the device probe() and remove() methods less
> complicated let's move the DT- and ACPI-specific code to the
> respective sub-functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Feiyang Chen <chenfeiyang@...ngson.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Yinggang Gu <guyinggang@...ngson.cn>
> Acked-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>
> Signed-off-by: Yanteng Si <siyanteng@...ngson.cn>

@Serge: I think this addresses your comment on the previous iteration, 
but it would be great if you could have a look!

Thanks,

Paolo