netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v5 3/4] igc: Enable PCIe PTM

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, 09 Jun 2021 16:07:20 -0700
From:   Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
To:     Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, richardcochran@...il.com,
        hch@...radead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        helgaas@...nel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH next-queue v5 3/4] igc: Enable PCIe PTM

Hi Paul,

>> 
>>> Regarding my comment, I did not mean returning an error but the log
>>> *level* of the message. So, `dmesg --level err` would show that message.
>>> But if there are PCI controllers not supporting that, it’s not an error,
>>> but a warning at most. So, I’d use:
>>>
>>> 	dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "PTM not supported by PCI bus/controller
>>> (pci_enable_ptm() failed)\n");
>> 
>> I will use you suggestion for the message, but I think that warn is a
>> bit too much, info or notice seem to be better.
>
> I do not know, if modern PCI(e)(?) controllers normally support PTM or 
> not. If recent controllers should support it, then a warning would be 
> warranted, otherwise a notice.
>

>From the Intel side, it seems that it's been supported for a few years.
So, fair enough, let's go with a warn.


Cheers,
-- 
Vinicius