linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] net: stmmac: xgmac: fix safety error descriptions

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]

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 11:09:06 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Furong Xu <0x1207@...il.com>, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexandre Torgue
 <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>, Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Maxime
 Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, Joao Pinto <jpinto@...opsys.com>,
 Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 xfr@...look.com, rock.xu@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: stmmac: xgmac: fix safety error descriptions

On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 10:34 +0800, Furong Xu wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:25:27 +0300
> Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 04:50:37PM +0800, Furong Xu wrote:
> > > Commit 56e58d6c8a56 ("net: stmmac: Implement Safety Features in
> > > XGMAC core") prints safety error descriptions when safety error assert,
> > > but missed some special errors, and mixed correctable errors and
> > > uncorrectable errors together.
> > > This patch complete the error code list and print the type of errors.  
> > 
> > The XGMAC ECC Safety code has likely been just copied from the DW GMAC
> > v5 (DW QoS Eth) part. So this change is partly relevant to that code too. I
> > can't confirm that the special errors support is relevant to the DW
> > QoS Eth too (it likely is though), so what about splitting this patch
> > up into two:
> > 1. Elaborate the errors description for DW GMAC v5 and DW XGMAC.
> > 2. Add new ECC safety errors support.
> > ?
> > 
> > On the other hand if we were sure that both DW QoS Eth and XGMAC
> > safety features implementation match the ideal solution would be to
> > refactor out the common code into a dedicated module.
> > 
> > -Serge(y)
> > 
> 
> Checked XGMAC Version 3.20a and DW QoS Eth Version 5.20a, the safety error
> code definitions are not identical at all, they do have some differences,
> about more than 20 bits of status register are different.
> I think we should just leave them in individual implementations.

@Serge: given the above, would you still advice for splitting this
patch into 2?

Thanks,

Paolo