linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v9 3/7] net: stmmac: refactor FPE verification process

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: <20240906124924.odfhsgiyg4jkrnqx@skbuf>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 15:49:24 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Furong Xu <0x1207@...il.com>
Cc: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
	"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>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
	Joao Pinto <jpinto@...opsys.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk, linux@...linux.org.uk, xfr@...look.com,
	Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 3/7] net: stmmac: refactor FPE verification
 process

On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 03:41:09PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 12:55:58PM +0800, Furong Xu wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> > @@ -969,17 +969,30 @@ static void stmmac_mac_config(struct phylink_config *config, unsigned int mode,
> >  static void stmmac_fpe_link_state_handle(struct stmmac_priv *priv, bool is_up)
> >  {
> >  	struct stmmac_fpe_cfg *fpe_cfg = &priv->fpe_cfg;
> > -	enum stmmac_fpe_state *lo_state = &fpe_cfg->lo_fpe_state;
> > -	enum stmmac_fpe_state *lp_state = &fpe_cfg->lp_fpe_state;
> > -	bool *hs_enable = &fpe_cfg->hs_enable;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> >  
> > -	if (is_up && *hs_enable) {
> > -		stmmac_fpe_send_mpacket(priv, priv->ioaddr, fpe_cfg,
> > -					MPACKET_VERIFY);
> > +	timer_shutdown_sync(&fpe_cfg->verify_timer);
> >  }
> >  
> >  static void stmmac_mac_link_down(struct phylink_config *config,
> > @@ -4091,10 +4068,10 @@ static int stmmac_release(struct net_device *dev)
> >  
> >  	stmmac_release_ptp(priv);
> >  
> > -	pm_runtime_put(priv->device);
> > -
> >  	if (priv->dma_cap.fpesel)
> > -		stmmac_fpe_stop_wq(priv);
> > +		timer_shutdown_sync(&priv->fpe_cfg.verify_timer);
> > +
> > +	pm_runtime_put(priv->device);
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> > @@ -7372,53 +7334,88 @@ int stmmac_reinit_ringparam(struct net_device *dev, u32 rx_size, u32 tx_size)
> > +static void stmmac_fpe_verify_timer_arm(struct stmmac_fpe_cfg *fpe_cfg)
> > +{
> > +	if (fpe_cfg->pmac_enabled && fpe_cfg->tx_enabled &&
> > +	    fpe_cfg->verify_enabled &&
> > +	    fpe_cfg->status != ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_FAILED &&
> > +	    fpe_cfg->status != ETHTOOL_MM_VERIFY_STATUS_SUCCEEDED) {
> > +		timer_setup(&fpe_cfg->verify_timer, stmmac_fpe_verify_timer, 0);
> > +		mod_timer(&fpe_cfg->verify_timer, jiffies);
> > +	}
> > +}
> > @@ -7875,15 +7874,8 @@ int stmmac_suspend(struct device *dev)
> >  	}
> >  	rtnl_unlock();
> >  
> > -	if (priv->dma_cap.fpesel) {
> > -		/* Disable FPE */
> > -		stmmac_fpe_configure(priv, priv->ioaddr,
> > -				     &priv->fpe_cfg,
> > -				     priv->plat->tx_queues_to_use,
> > -				     priv->plat->rx_queues_to_use, false);
> > -
> > -		stmmac_fpe_stop_wq(priv);
> > -	}
> > +	if (priv->dma_cap.fpesel)
> > +		timer_shutdown_sync(&priv->fpe_cfg.verify_timer);
> >  
> >  	priv->speed = SPEED_UNKNOWN;
> >  	return 0;
> 
> Calling timer_setup() after timer_shutdown_sync() is a bit unconventional,
> but I don't see why it shouldn't work.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>

Actually, I'm really wondering. Is lockdep okay if you run timer_shutdown_sync()
on a timer on which you've never called timer_setup()?