netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: dsa: microchip: add microchip,no-tag-protocol flag

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: <20240806171704.GA1749400-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 11:17:04 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: vtpieter@...il.com
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, woojung.huh@...rochip.com,
	UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	o.rempel@...gutronix.de,
	Pieter Van Trappen <pieter.van.trappen@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: dsa: microchip: add
 microchip,no-tag-protocol flag

On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 02:31:42PM +0200, vtpieter@...il.com wrote:
> From: Pieter Van Trappen <pieter.van.trappen@...n.ch>
> 
> Add microchip,no-tag-protocol flag to allow disabling the switch'

What is the ' for?

> tagging protocol. For cases where the CPU MAC does not support MTU
> size > 1500 such as the Zynq GEM.

What is "switch tag protocol"? Not defined anywhere? Is that VLAN 
tagging?

It seems to me that this doesn't need to be in DT. You know you have 
Zynq GEM because it should have a specific compatible. If it doesn't 
support some feature, then that should get propagated to the switch 
somehow.

Rob