linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: dsa: mt7530: fix disabling EEE on failure on MT7531 and MT7988

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: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:46:19 +0300
From: arinc.unal@...nc9.com
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
 DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, Andrew
 Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir
 Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Matthias
 Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
 <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>, Russell King
 <linux@...linux.org.uk>, SkyLake Huang <SkyLake.Huang@...iatek.com>, Heiner
 Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: Bartel Eerdekens <bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be>,
 mithat.guner@...ont.com, erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] net: dsa: mt7530: fix disabling EEE on failure
 on MT7531 and MT7988

On 26.03.2024 12:19, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> On 26.03.2024 12:02, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> If I read the past discussion correctly, this is a potential issue
>> found by code inspection and never producing problem in practice, am I
>> correct?
>> 
>> If so I think it will deserve a 3rd party tested-by tag or similar to
>> go in.
>> 
>> If nobody could provide such feedback in a little time, I suggest to
>> drop this patch and apply only 1/2.
> 
> Whether a problem would happen in practice depends on when 
> phy_init_eee()
> fails, meaning it returns a negative non-zero code. I requested Russell 
> to
> review this patch to shed light on when phy_init_eee() would return a
> negative non-zero code so we have an idea whether this patch actually 
> fixes
> a problem.

I don't suppose Russell is going to review the patch at this point. I 
will
submit this to net-next then. If someone actually reports a problem in
practice, I can always submit it to the stable trees.

Arınç