netdev - RE: [PATCH v2 11/14] bnx2x: Update bnx2x to use new vlan accleration.

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:	Sun, 24 Oct 2010 03:11:59 -0700
From:	"Vladislav Zolotarov" <vladz@...adcom.com>
To:	"Vladislav Zolotarov" <vladz@...adcom.com>,
	"Jesse Gross" <jesse@...ira.com>
cc:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Hao Zheng" <hzheng@...ira.com>,
	"Eilon Greenstein" <eilong@...adcom.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 11/14] bnx2x: Update bnx2x to use new vlan
 accleration.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Vladislav Zolotarov
> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 11:22 AM
> To: Jesse Gross
> Cc: David Miller; netdev@...r.kernel.org; Hao Zheng; Eilon Greenstein
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 11/14] bnx2x: Update bnx2x to use new vlan
> accleration.
> 
> 
> 
> > >
> > > We hit the same BUG() both when VLAN stripping is disabled.
> >
> > This one surprises me because that function shouldn't get called at
> > all when VLAN stripping is disabled.  Are you sure that it is
> > disabled?  From my reading of the bnx2x driver it seems like it is
> > always enabled.
> 
> I tried to check all possibilities and to check at which level the
> problem is,
> so I patched the bnx2x not to do the stripping and recompiled it with
> the
> kernel having CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q disabled. Then I saw the (same) BUG()
> message
> again. It seems to me that your patch series were meant to remove the
> handling of this configuration (CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q) from the L2 drivers
> as well, isn't it? This means that the same VLAN flows, both
> accelerated and none
> accelerated should be "active" both when this configuration is present
> and
> when it's not... Do I get it right?
> 
> Thanks,
> vlad

Jesse, from the fix u posted I conclude that the answer on the above questions is
obviously "yes"... ;) 

I first answered your question and only then looked at the "fixing" 
thread, my apologies... ;)

thanks,
vlad

> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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


--
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