linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] thunderbolt: thunderbolt: add vendor's NVM formats

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: <Yvt+a1kBLWmBgWXl@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Aug 2022 13:24:27 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Szuying Chen <chensiying21@...il.com>
Cc:     mario.limonciello@....com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
        andreas.noever@...il.com, michael.jamet@...el.com,
        YehezkelShB@...il.com, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yd_Tseng@...edia.com.tw,
        Chloe_Chen@...edia.com.tw, Richard_Hsu@...edia.com.tw
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] thunderbolt: thunderbolt: add vendor's NVM formats

On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 06:55:02PM +0800, Szuying Chen wrote:
> @@ -527,6 +539,7 @@ int tb_port_state(struct tb_port *port)
>  {
>  	struct tb_cap_phy phy;
>  	int res;
> +
>  	if (port->cap_phy == 0) {
>  		tb_port_WARN(port, "does not have a PHY\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -556,6 +569,7 @@ int tb_wait_for_port(struct tb_port *port, bool wait_if_unplugged)
>  {
>  	int retries = 10;
>  	int state;
> +
>  	if (!port->cap_phy) {
>  		tb_port_WARN(port, "does not have PHY\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -653,6 +667,7 @@ int tb_port_add_nfc_credits(struct tb_port *port, int credits)
>  int tb_port_clear_counter(struct tb_port *port, int counter)
>  {
>  	u32 zero[3] = { 0, 0, 0 };
> +
>  	tb_port_dbg(port, "clearing counter %d\n", counter);
>  	return tb_port_write(port, zero, TB_CFG_COUNTERS, 3 * counter, 3);
>  }
> @@ -875,6 +890,7 @@ static inline bool tb_switch_is_reachable(const struct tb_switch *parent,
>  					  const struct tb_switch *sw)
>  {
>  	u64 mask = (1ULL << parent->config.depth * 8) - 1;
> +
>  	return (tb_route(parent) & mask) == (tb_route(sw) & mask);
>  }
> 

These changes have nothing to do with your patch submission, and should
be a different patch entirely.

Remember, only do one-logical-thing per patch.

thanks,

greg k-h