netdev - Re: [PATCH netdev v2] net: stmmac: dwmac-rk: Provide FIFO sizes for DWMAC 1000

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z9Ge6rLHynH1ATjz@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 15:49:14 +0100
From: Michal Kubiak <michal.kubiak@...el.com>
To: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...nel.org>
CC: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Heiko Stuebner
	<heiko@...ech.de>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Kunihiko Hayashi
	<hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH netdev v2] net: stmmac: dwmac-rk: Provide FIFO sizes for
 DWMAC 1000

On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 08:42:06PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
> 
> The DWMAC 1000 DMA capabilities register does not provide actual
> FIFO sizes, nor does the driver really care. If they are not
> provided via some other means, the driver will work fine, only
> disallowing changing the MTU setting.
> 
> Provide the FIFO sizes through the driver's platform data to enable
> MTU changes. The FIFO sizes are confirmed to be the same across RK3288,
> RK3328, RK3399 and PX30, based on their respective manuals. It is
> likely that Rockchip synthesized their DWMAC 1000 with the same
> parameters on all their chips that have it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Removed references to breakage from commit message as it is already fixed
> - Removed Cc stable and Fixes tags
> - Rebased onto latest -next

The tag of the patch should clearly describe the destination tree. It
can be either "net" or "net-next". "netdev" is not a proper tag.
Assuming you removed the "Fixes" tag, you probably want to send the
patch to "net-next".

Thanks,
Michal