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, 25 Feb 2018 17:27:36 +0300
From:   Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sh_eth: TSU_QTAG0/1 registers the same as
 TSU_QTAGM0/1

On 02/25/2018 04:14 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

>> The TSU_QTAG0/1 registers found in the Gigabit Ether controllers actually
>> have the same long name  as the TSU_QTAGM0/1 registers in the early Ether
>> controllers:  Qtag Addition/Deletion Set Register (Port 0/1 to 1/0); thus
>> there's no need to make a difference in sh_eth_tsu_init() between those
>> controllers. Unfortunately, we can't just remove TSU_QTAG0/1 from the
>> register *enum* because that would break the ethtool register dump...
>>
>> Fixes: b0ca2a21f769 ("sh_eth: Add support of SH7763 to sh_eth")
>> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
> 
> Thanks for your patch!
> 
>> --- net-next.orig/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
>> +++ net-next/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/sh_eth.c
> 
>> @@ -2097,8 +2097,6 @@ static size_t __sh_eth_get_regs(struct n
>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSL0);
>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSL1);
>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSLC);
>> -               add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAG0);
>> -               add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAG1);
> 
> Shouldn't you keep the above for ethtool register dump?

   Why dump the same registers twice? These are no longer marked as valid in the dump
buffer and a dump user's only source of info about the valid registers is the bitmap
at the start of the buffer...
   Note that the dump is only done for the registers actually used by the driver, and
these 2 regs are no longer used anywhere...

>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAGM0);
>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_QTAGM1);
>>                 add_tsu_reg(TSU_FWSR);

MBR, Sergei

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ