linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 09/11] net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpsw-qos: Add Frame Preemption MAC Merge support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 14 Dec 2023 15:50:39 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Roger Quadros <rogerq@...nel.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, shuah@...nel.org, s-vadapalli@...com,
        r-gunasekaran@...com, vigneshr@...com, srk@...com,
        horms@...nel.org, p-varis@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 09/11] net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpsw-qos: Add
 Frame Preemption MAC Merge support

On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 03:44:03PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 14/12/2023 13:04, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> >> +	/* verify_timeout_count can only be set at valid link */
> >> +	if (cfg->verify_time > 0)
> >> +		port->qos.iet.verify_time_ms = cfg->verify_time;
> >> +	else
> >> +		port->qos.iet.verify_time_ms = 10;
> > 
> > I don't think I understand what the check is for? The netlink policy for
> > ETHTOOL_A_MM_VERIFY_TIME limits the range between 1 ms and 128 ms.
> > How can it be 0?
> 
> I didn't check ETHTOOL_A_MM_VERIFY_TIME before.

Not even when the exact same policy was rejecting the verify-time set by
LLDP in v6, for being larger than the upper limit of 128 ms? :-/