linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/8] switchdev: mrp: Extend ring_role_mrp and in_role

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: <20210217160923.fimumxafloc6276i@skbuf>
Date:   Wed, 17 Feb 2021 16:09:23 +0000
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
CC:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "jiri@...nulli.us" <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "ivecera@...hat.com" <ivecera@...hat.com>,
        "nikolay@...dia.com" <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        "roopa@...dia.com" <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        "alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        "UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "vivien.didelot@...il.com" <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk" <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/8] switchdev: mrp: Extend ring_role_mrp and
 in_role_mrp

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 04:58:45PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> > If a driver implements full MRP offload for a ring/interconnect
> > manager/automanager, should it return -EOPNOTSUPP when sw_backup=false?
> 
> In that case it should return 0.
> So if the driver can:
> - fully support MRP, when sw_backup = false, return 0. Then end of story.
> - partially support MRP, when sw_backup = false, return -EOPNOTSUPP,
>                          when sw_backup = true, return 0.
> - no support at all, return -EOPNOTSUPP.

Damn, I asked the wrong question.
I meant to ask about what it should return when sw_backup=true.
But you answered anyway that if it returns 0 when sw_backup=false, it
can simply not deal with the case where sw_backup=true, because that is
never supposed to happen.