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, 25 Jan 2021 20:40:51 +0100
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     stable@...r.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 46/58] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: also read STU state in
 mv88e6250_g1_vtu_getnext

On 25/01/2021 19.39, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> From: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
> 
> commit 87fe04367d842c4d97a77303242d4dd4ac351e46 upstream.
> 

Greg, please drop this from 4.19-stable. Details:

> 
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c
> @@ -357,6 +357,10 @@ int mv88e6185_g1_vtu_getnext(struct mv88
>  		if (err)
>  			return err;
>  
> +		err = mv88e6185_g1_stu_data_read(chip, entry);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +

The function that this patch applied to in mainline did not exist in
v4.19. It seems that this hunk has been applied in the similar
mv88e6185_g1_vtu_getnext(), and indeed, in current 4.19.y, just one more
line of context shows this:

    353                 err = mv88e6185_g1_stu_data_read(chip, entry);
    354                 if (err)
    355                         return err;
    356
    357                 /* VTU DBNum[3:0] are located in VTU Operation 3:0
    358                  * VTU DBNum[7:4] are located in VTU Operation 11:8
    359                  */
    360                 err = mv88e6xxx_g1_read(chip,
MV88E6XXX_G1_VTU_OP, &val);
    361                 if (err)
    362                         return err;


IOW, it would be a pointless noop adding the same call again.

Rasmus

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ