linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with multiple CPU ports on MT7530

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: <20230613201850.5g4u3wf2kllmlk27@skbuf>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2023 23:18:50 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
Cc:     Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
        Bartel Eerdekens <bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be>,
        mithat.guner@...ont.com, erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with
 multiple CPU ports on MT7530

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:58:33PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> On 13.06.2023 20:39, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > Got it. Then this is really not a problem, and the commit message frames
> > it incorrectly.
> 
> Actually this patch fixes the issue it describes. At the state of this
> patch, when multiple CPU ports are defined, port 5 is the active CPU port,
> CPU_PORT bits are set to port 6.
> 
> Once "the patch that prefers port 6, I could easily find the exact name but
> your mail snipping makes it hard" is applied, this issue becomes redundant.

Ok. Well, you don't get bonus points for fixing a problem in 2 different
ways, once is enough :)