netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ravb/sh_eth: fix sleep in atomic by reusing shared ethtool handlers

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:   Sat, 7 Jul 2018 18:22:08 +0300
From:   Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com
Cc:     andrew@...n.ch, geert@...ux-m68k.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ravb/sh_eth: fix sleep in atomic by reusing
 shared ethtool handlers

On 7/7/2018 4:47 AM, David Miller wrote:

>> For ages trivial changes to RAVB and SuperH ethernet links by means of
>> standard 'ethtool' trigger a 'sleeping function called from invalid
>> context' bug, to visualize it on r8a7795 ULCB:
>   ...
>> The root cause is that an attempt to modify ECMR and GECMR registers
>> only when RX/TX function is disabled was too overcomplicated in its
>> original implementation, also processing of an optional Link Change
>> interrupt added even more complexity, as a result the implementation
>> was error prone.
>>
>> The new locking scheme is confirmed to be correct by dumping driver
>> specific and generic PHY framework function calls with aid of ftrace
>> while running more or less advanced tests.
>>
>> Please note that sh_eth patches from the series were built-tested only.
>>
>> On purpose I do not add Fixes tags, the reused PHY handlers were added
>> way later than the fixed problems were firstly found in the drivers.
>>
>> Changes from v1 to v2:
>> * the original patches are split to bugfixes and enhancements only,
>>    both v1 and v2 series are absolutely equal in total, thus I omit
>>    description of changes in individual patches,
>> * the latter implies that there should be no strict need for retesting,
>>    but because formally two series are different, I have to drop the tags
>>    given by Geert and Andrew, please send your tags again.
> 
> Series applied with Fixes: tags of patches 8 and 9 fixed up.

    So you applied the whole series to net.git... that was somewhat 
unexpected, at least by me. Care to share your reasoning?

> Thanks.

MBR, Sergei