linux-kernel - Re: [net-next] octeontx2-pf: ethtool: Display "Autoneg" and "Port" fields

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aC8GWDelB9YwOKIz@test-OptiPlex-Tower-Plus-7010>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 16:41:20 +0530
From: Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sunil Goutham
	<sgoutham@...vell.com>,
        Linu Cherian <lcherian@...vell.com>,
        Geetha sowjanya
	<gakula@...vell.com>,
        Jerin Jacob <jerinj@...vell.com>,
        Subbaraya Sundeep
	<sbhatta@...vell.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
        "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Bharat Bhushan <bbhushan2@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next] octeontx2-pf: ethtool: Display "Autoneg" and "Port"
 fields

On 2025-05-21 at 05:20:19, Jakub Kicinski (kuba@...nel.org) wrote:
> On Mon, 19 May 2025 16:53:33 +0530 Hariprasad Kelam wrote:
> > The Octeontx2/CN10k netdev drivers access a shared firmware structure
> > to obtain link configuration details, such as supported and advertised
> > link modes.
> > 
> > This patch updates the shared firmware data to include additional
> > fields like 'Autonegotiation' and 'Port type'.
> > 
> > example output:
> >   ethtool ethx
> > 	 Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes
> > 	 Port: Twisted Pair
> 
> Can you add the real output without trimming please?
  Ack
> 
> > +	cmd->base.port = rsp->fwdata.port;
> 
> Do you validate somewhere this value is within the legitimate values
> from kernel uAPI?
  No, missed adding validation.
  Will address this in next version.