linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] e1000e: ignore factory-default checksum value on TGP platform

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: <b4a3ddf4-c03f-426d-868a-f6e75cda179a@jacekk.info>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 18:08:47 +0200
From: Jacek Kowalski <jacek@...ekk.info>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] e1000e: ignore factory-default checksum value on
 TGP platform

>>>> +	if (hw->mac.type == e1000_pch_tgp && checksum == 
>>>> (u16)NVM_SUM_FACTORY_DEFAULT) {
>>> 
>>> I see that a similar cast is applied to NVM_SUM. But why? If 
>>> it's not necessary then I would advocate dropping it.
>> 
>> It's like that since the beginning of git history, tracing back to
>> e1000(...)
>> 
>> I'd really prefer to keep it as-is here for a moment, since 
>> similar constructs are not only here, and then clean them up 
>> separately.
> 
> Ok. But can we look into cleaning this up as a follow-up?

Sure, I'll prepare the patch and send it once this series is applied.

-- 
Best regards,
   Jacek Kowalski