netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: clarify GSWIP 2.2 VLAN mode in comment

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: <aPiLJXZu_BaZrYX6@pidgin.makrotopia.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 08:43:33 +0100
From: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: clarify GSWIP
 2.2 VLAN mode in comment

Hi Andrew,

On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 04:29:26AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2025 at 01:46:54PM +0100, Daniel Golle wrote:
> 61;8003;1c> The comment above writing the default PVID incorrectly states that
> > "GSWIP 2.2 (GRX300) and later program here the VID directly."
> > The truth is that even GSWIP 2.2 and newer maintain the behavior of
> > GSWIP 2.1 unless the VLANMD bit in PCE Global Control Register 1 is
> > set ("GSWIP2.2 VLAN Mode").
> > Fix the misleading comment accordingly.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>

Thank you for reviewing, however, you've replied to the surperseded v3
submission while v5 is current. The patches for which you sent a
Reviewed-by:-tag have not changed since v3, except for 2/7 which is now
using the `REGMAP_UPSHIFT(2)` macro instead of `-2` as a plain number.
Would you mind sending the Reviewed-by:-tags again in reply to the v5[1]
patches?

Cheers

Daniel

[1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=1013992