netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bnxt_en: define sriov

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:   Wed, 26 Jul 2017 15:18:32 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Sathya Perla <sathya.perla@...adcom.com>
Cc:     Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Somnath Kotur <somnath.kotur@...adcom.com>,
        Deepak Khungar <deepak.khungar@...adcom.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bnxt_en: define sriov_lock unconditionally

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Sathya Perla
<sathya.perla@...adcom.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> [...]
>>> Sathya already sent 3 patches to fix some of these issues.  But I need
>>> to rework one of his patch and resend.
>>
>> Ok, thanks. I just ran into one more issue, and don't know if that's included
>> as well. If not, please also add the patch below (or fold it into the one
>> that adds the switchdev dependency to the ethernet driver):
>>
>> 8<----------
>> Subject: [PATCH] RDMA/bnxt_re: add NET_SWITCHDEV dependency
>>
>> The rdma side of BNXT enables the ethernet driver and has a list
>> of its dependencies. However, the ethernet driver now also depends
>> on NET_SWITCHDEV, so we have to add that dependency for both:
>
> Arnd, after the patch "bnxt_en: use SWITCHDEV_SET_OPS() for setting
> vf_rep_switchdev_ops" the bnxt_en driver doesn't need an explicit
> NET_SWITCHDEV dependency. So, the bnxt_re driver shouldn't need one
> either. Are you still seeing the bnxt_re issue even after pulling the
> above patch??

I think that's fine then. I missed that patch when it went in, so I only
needed the add-on since I still had my own earlier patch. I'll drop both
from my test tree now, and will let you know in case something else
remains.

         Arnd