netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 4/4] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Refactor CPU and DSA port setup

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, 2 Dec 2016 22:18:06 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 4/4] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Refactor CPU and DSA
 port setup

> The port's EgressMode, FrameMode and EtherType are really tied together
> to compose the mode of the port.

Setting the EtherType is somewhat separate. It is only needed on ports
using EDSA. And that can only happen on a CPU port. Humm, actually, i
set it when i should not. But putting this in a wrapper actually hides
this.

> Could you add an helper in chip.c like:
> 
>     static int mv88e6xxx_set_port_mode(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, int port,
>                                        enum mv88e6xxx_frame_mode frame_mode,
>                                        u16 egress_mode, bool egress_unknown,
>                                        u16 ethertype)
>     {
>         int err;
> 
>         if (chip->info->ops->port_set_frame_mode) {
>             err = chip->info->ops->port_set_frame_mode(chip, port, frame_mode);
>             if (err)
>                 return err;
>         }

Ignoring that it is not implemented here is wrong. It must be
implemented, or the device is not going to work. It is a question of,
do we want an oops, or return an error code.

New version coming.

    Andrew