netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: xlnx,axi-ethernet: Add bindings for AXI 2.5G MAC

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: <410bf89c-7218-463d-9edf-f43fc1047c89@linux.dev>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 10:57:45 -0500
From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
To: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
 Suraj Gupta <suraj.gupta2@....com>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, michal.simek@....com,
 radhey.shyam.pandey@....com, horms@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 git@....com, harini.katakam@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: xlnx,axi-ethernet: Add
 bindings for AXI 2.5G MAC

On 11/18/24 10:54, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 13:48:21 +0530
> Suraj Gupta <suraj.gupta2@....com> wrote:
> 
>> AXI 1G/2.5G Ethernet subsystem supports 1G and 2.5G speeds. "max-speed"
>> property is used to distinguish 1G and 2.5G MACs of AXI 1G/2.5G IP.
>> max-speed is made a required property, and it breaks DT ABI but driver
>> implementation ensures backward compatibility and assumes 1G when this
>> property is absent.
>> Modify existing bindings description for 2.5G MAC.
> 
> That may be a silly question, but as this is another version of the IP
> that behaves differently than the 1G version, could you use instead a
> dedicated compatible string for the 2.5G variant ?
> 
> As the current one is :
> 
> compatible = "xlnx,axi-ethernet-1.00.a";
> 
> it seems to already contain some version information.
> 
> But I might also be missing something :)

As it happens, this is not another version of the same IP but a
different configuration. It's just that no one has bothered to add 2.5G
support yet.

And to my understanding, the device tree should not contain any info
that can be reliably detected from the hardware.

--Sean