linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 RFC 1/9] wifi: rtw88: Clear RTW_FLAG_POWERON early in rtw_mac_power

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: <CAFBinCBpeOH4tzrqHxPQ475=HLOWDKfJYLEEigfTmTJwQbGAAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Mar 2023 21:07:33 +0100
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To:     Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
Cc:     "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yan-Hsuan Chuang <tony0620emma@...il.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chris Morgan <macroalpha82@...il.com>,
        Nitin Gupta <nitin.gupta981@...il.com>,
        Neo Jou <neojou@...il.com>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RFC 1/9] wifi: rtw88: Clear RTW_FLAG_POWERON early in rtw_mac_power_switch()

Hello Ping-Ke,

On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 3:29 AM Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com> wrote:
[...]
> > +       if (!pwr_on)
> > +               clear_bit(RTW_FLAG_POWERON, rtwdev->flags);
> > +
> >         pwr_seq = pwr_on ? chip->pwr_on_seq : chip->pwr_off_seq;
> >         ret = rtw_pwr_seq_parser(rtwdev, pwr_seq);
> >         if (ret)
>
> This patch changes the behavior if rtw_pwr_seq_parser() returns error while
> doing power-off, but I dig and think further about this case hardware stays in
> abnormal state. I think it would be fine to see this state as POWER_OFF.
> Do you agree this as well?
I agree with you. Also I think I should have made it clearer in the
description of the patch that I'm potentially changing the behavior
(and that this is not an issue in my opinion).
If there's any problem during the power on/off sequence then we can't
be fully sure about the power state.
If you have any suggestions how to improve this then please let me know.


Best regards,
Martin