netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: move mv88e6xxx_hwtstamp

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: <9d3eb839-99be-4d08-96ec-8bee1dec073a@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 14:46:05 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: move
 mv88e6xxx_hwtstamp_work() prototype

> This leaves the shim definition (for when CONFIG_NET_DSA_MV88E6XXX_PTP
> is not defined) in ptp.h. It creates an inconsistency and potential
> problem - the same header should provide all definitions of the same
> function.

How big is the PTP code? We have added a lot of code to this driver
since PTP was added. I suspect the PTP code is now small compared to
the rest of the driver, so does it still make sense to have it
optional? Also once the PTP code gets moved into a library and shared
by the Marvell PHY driver and other Marvell MAC drivers, won't we have
an overall code shrink even when it is enabled in DSA?

Maybe it is time for CONFIG_NET_DSA_MV88E6XXX_PTP to go away?

	Andrew