netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v17 00/14] Introduce PHY listing and link

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: <6b84cdf2-34c8-4e61-857e-79a1d5e782da@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 17:43:52 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
	Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>,
	Piergiorgio Beruto <piergiorgio.beruto@...il.com>,
	Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
	Nicolò Veronese <nicveronese@...il.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, mwojtas@...omium.org,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
	Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	Romain Gantois <romain.gantois@...tlin.com>,
	Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v17 00/14] Introduce PHY listing and
 link_topology tracking

> Jakub, as you say it looks solid. I can add to that that I have been using
> this series widely through the double Ethernet attachment on several boards
> and it works well, it is stable and more performant than the dirty home-made
> solution we had on v4.14.

Have you posted a Tested-by:

You can also post Reviewed-by: if you have taken a look at the
code. It won't have the same value as one from Rusell, but it does add
some degree of warm fuzzy feeling this code is O.K, and it starts
building your reputation as a reviewer.

	Andrew