linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] fsl_ucc_hdlc: process the result of hold

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: <977826f0-3289-53bd-b3f6-90977a4e0ca0@astralinux.ru>
Date:   Fri, 1 Sep 2023 13:48:03 +0300
From:   Александра Дюпина 
        <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Zhao Qiang <qiang.zhao@....com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fsl_ucc_hdlc: process the result of hold_open()

Thanks for the review!

28.08.2023 22:38, Jakub Kicinski пишет:
> Don't you have to undo all the things done prior to hdlc_open()?
Yes, it looks like I really need to undo everything that was done before 
hdlc_open().
But the question arose - would it be enough to call the uhdlc_close(dev) 
function?
In addition, it seems to me and my colleagues that a call to 
hdlc_close(dev) should be added to the uhdlc_close() function, similar 
to the following functions:
1. drivers/net/wan/n2.c (n2_close function)
2. drivers/net/wan/pc300too.c (pc300_close function)
3. drivers/net/wan/pci200syn.c (pci200_close function)
4. drivers/net/wan/wanxl.c (wanxl_close function)
Tell me, please, are we wrong?