linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/3] net: phy: add concept of shared storage for PHYs

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: <20200421155031.GE933345@lunn.ch>
Date:   Tue, 21 Apr 2020 17:50:31 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 1/3] net: phy: add concept of shared storage
 for PHYs

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 05:25:19PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am 2020-04-21 01:26, schrieb Michael Walle:
> > +
> > +/* Represents a shared structure between different phydev's in the same
> > + * package, for example a quad PHY. See phy_package_join() and
> > + * phy_package_leave().
> > + */
> > +struct phy_package_shared {
> > +	int addr;
> > +	refcount_t refcnt;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > +	/* private data pointer */
> > +	/* note that this pointer is shared between different phydevs and
> > +	 * the user has to take care of appropriate locking.
> > +	 */
> > +	void *priv;
> 
> btw. how should a driver actually use this? I mean, it can allocate
> memory if its still NULL but when will it be freed again. Do we need
> a callback? Is there something better than a callback?

Good point. phy_package_join() should take a size_t and do the
allocation. phy_package_leave() would then free it.

But since we don't have a user at the moment, maybe leave it out.

    Andrew