netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/7] usbnet: smsc95xx: Forward PHY interrupts to PHY driver to avoid polling

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:   Mon, 23 May 2022 14:34:49 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Cc:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        Steve Glendinning <steve.glendinning@...well.net>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>,
        Andre Edich <andre.edich@...rochip.com>,
        Oleksij Rempel <linux@...pel-privat.de>,
        Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...labora.com>,
        Gabriel Hojda <ghojda@...urs.ro>,
        Christoph Fritz <chf.fritz@...glemail.com>,
        Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>,
        Philipp Rosenberger <p.rosenberger@...bus.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Ferry Toth <fntoth@...il.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        'Linux Samsung SOC' <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/7] usbnet: smsc95xx: Forward PHY interrupts
 to PHY driver to avoid polling

> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> @@ -283,8 +283,11 @@ static __maybe_unused int mdio_bus_phy_suspend(struct device *dev)
>  	 * may call phy routines that try to grab the same lock, and that may
>  	 * lead to a deadlock.
>  	 */
> -	if (phydev->attached_dev && phydev->adjust_link)
> +	if (phydev->attached_dev && phydev->adjust_link) {
> +		if (phy_interrupt_is_valid(phydev))
> +			synchronize_irq(phydev->irq);
>  		phy_stop_machine(phydev);
> +	}

What is this hunk trying to achieve? As far as i know, interrupts have
not been disabled. So as soon as the call to synchronize_irq()
finishes, could well be another interrupt happens.

	  Andrew