linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/8] net: ethtool: pse-pd: Expand pse commands with the PSE PoE interface

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: <20231204162825.40e566fe@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
Date:   Mon, 4 Dec 2023 16:28:25 +0100
From:   Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Russ Weight <russ.weight@...ux.dev>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Dent Project <dentproject@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/8] net: ethtool: pse-pd: Expand pse
 commands with the PSE PoE interface

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 19:45:18 +0100
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:

> > @@ -143,6 +150,43 @@ ethnl_set_pse(struct ethnl_req_info *req_info, struct
> > genl_info *info) return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	if (!tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL] &&
> > +	    !tb[ETHTOOL_A_C33_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL])
> > +		return 0;  
> 
> -EINVAL? Is there a real use case for not passing either of them?

No indeed.

> > +
> > +	if (tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL] &&
> > +	    !(pse_get_types(phydev->psec) & PSE_PODL)) {
> > +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(info->extack,
> > +				    tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL],
> > +				    "setting PSE PoDL admin control not
> > supported");
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +	}
> > +	if (tb[ETHTOOL_A_C33_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL] &&
> > +	    !(pse_get_types(phydev->psec) & PSE_C33)) {
> > +		NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(info->extack,
> > +				    tb[ETHTOOL_A_C33_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL],
> > +				    "setting PSE PoE admin control not
> > supported");  
> 
> This probably should be C33, not PoE?
> 
> I guess it depends on what the user space tools are using. 

Yes, I have hesitated on replacing that one.
If you prefer c33 in the log, I will change it in next version

Regards,
-- 
Köry Maincent, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com