[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45614C80.5070303@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 01:34:40 -0500
From: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>
To: Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC: Jay Cliburn <jacliburn@...lsouth.net>, jeff@...zik.org,
shemminger@...l.org, romieu@...zoreil.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] atl1: Revised Attansic L1 ethernet driver
Alan wrote:
> Would be nice if it used atl_ not at_ so its less likely to cause
> namespace clashes.
Some of this code looked like Attansic may have meant to share it
between drivers for atl1/atl2/atf1/atf2, but seeing as I can't find any
code for those, I'll convert it all to atl1_ and let Attansic generalize
the code if they ever decide they want to submit drivers.
> You have various macros for swaps that are pretty ugly - we have
> cpu_to and le/be_to_cpu functions for most swapping cases and these are
> generally optimised assembler (eg bswap on x86)
>
> AT_DESC_USED/UNUSED would be better as inline functions but thats not a
> serious concern.
>
> Be careful with :1 bitfields when working with hardware - the compiler
> has more than one choice about how to pack them.
Lacking a spec, I'm not entirely sure what the original intent was, so
we're stuck with testing. Is there a specific disambiguation technique
you recommend?
> The irq enable/disable use for locking on vlan appears unsafe. PCI
> interrupt delivery is asynchronous which means you can get this happen
>
>
> card sends PCI interrupt
> We call irq_disable
> We take lock
> We poke bits
> We drop lock
>
> PCI interrupt arrives
>
>
> This really does happen, typically its nasty to debug as well because you
> usually only get it on PIII boards on the one in n-zillion times a
> message collides and is retransmitted on the APIC bus.
Nice catch. I admit the VLAN code is not so well audited or tested.
Fortunately, the chip only seems to be on Asus M2V motherboards, at
least for now, but I want to audit all of the locking code at some point.
> skb->len is unsigned so <= 0 can be == 0. More importantly the subtraction
> before the test will wrap and is completely unsafe (see at_xmit_frame)
Thanks!
-- Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists