netdev - Re: [patch (for 2.6.25?) 1/1] smc91x driver: fix bug: print warning only in interrupt mode

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]

Date:	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:45:02 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, sonic.zhang@...log.com, cooloney@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [patch (for 2.6.25?) 1/1] smc91x driver: fix bug: print warning
 only in interrupt mode

akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
> From: Sonic Zhang <sonic.zhang@...log.com>
> 
> http://blackfin.uclinux.org/gf/project/uclinux-dist/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=3956
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sonic Zhang <sonic.zhang@...log.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan Wu <cooloney@...nel.org>
> Cc: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> ---
> 
>  drivers/net/smc91x.c |    2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff -puN drivers/net/smc91x.c~smc91x-driver-fix-bug-print-warning-only-in-interrupt-mode drivers/net/smc91x.c
> --- a/drivers/net/smc91x.c~smc91x-driver-fix-bug-print-warning-only-in-interrupt-mode
> +++ a/drivers/net/smc91x.c
> @@ -1326,9 +1326,11 @@ static irqreturn_t smc_interrupt(int irq
>  	SMC_SET_INT_MASK(lp, mask);
>  	spin_unlock(&lp->lock);
>  
> +#ifndef CONFIG_NET_POLL_CONTROLLER
>  	if (timeout == MAX_IRQ_LOOPS)
>  		PRINTK("%s: spurious interrupt (mask = 0x%02x)\n",
>  		       dev->name, mask);
> +#endif
>  	DBG(3, "%s: Interrupt done (%d loops)\n",
>  	       dev->name, MAX_IRQ_LOOPS - timeout);

NAK

Either this code is OK or it isn't.  This patch simply hides a problem 
inside a configuration the developer probably doesn't use.

What's the _real_ problem?  Looking at the tracker, I'd guess that some 
events need to be masked, but are not?

If the hardware is asserting events continually, the current code does 
the right thing -- keep processing interrupt events flagged, until (a) 
no more events asserted or (b) max loop count reached.

So the question is to find out why you are hitting the timeout, and what 
to do about it.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html