linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: use of_mdio_parse

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]

Message-ID: <CAC3K-4pH51jhKyEfq0mYDNz-+ir5VRe_Kzb082Gd+wiAxiGF7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:53:30 -0400
From:   Jon Mason <jon.mason@...adcom.com>
To:     Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: use of_mdio_parse_addr

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 02:22:51PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jon Mason <jon.mason@...adcom.com>
>> Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:43:30 -0400
>>
>> > use of_mdio_parse_addr() in place of an OF read of reg and a bounds
>> > check (which is litterally the exact same thing that
>> > of_mdio_parse_addr() does)
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jon Mason <jon.mason@...adcom.com>
>>
>> Applied, thanks Jon.
>
> This makes linux-next fail the modules_install target as depmod detects 2 circular
> dependencies. Reverting this patch fixes the issue.
>
> depmod: ERROR: Cycle detected: libphy -> of_mdio -> fixed_phy -> libphy
> depmod: ERROR: Cycle detected: libphy -> of_mdio -> libphy
> depmod: ERROR: Found 3 modules in dependency cycles!
> make[1]: *** [/home/dliviu/devel/kernel/Makefile:1245: _modinst_post] Error 1

I did not test this as modules.  Sorry.

It would be ugly to duplicate the code in both place, and the code in
question does not seem to really need to be in a C file.  Perhaps it
can be moved to a header file as an inline function, which would solve
this dependency.  Would this be acceptable?

Thanks,
Jon

>
> This is on an ARCH=arm build, build I doubt it makes a difference. Let me know if
> you need some .config values in order to reproduce.
>
> Best regards,
> Liviu
>