linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v9 4/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx

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: <1D189F224F826D6C+20250901072734.GA43225@nic-Precision-5820-Tower>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 15:27:34 +0800
From: Yibo Dong <dong100@...se.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
	corbet@....net, gur.stavi@...wei.com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, danishanwar@...com, lee@...ger.us,
	gongfan1@...wei.com, lorenzo@...nel.org, geert+renesas@...der.be,
	Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com, lukas.bulwahn@...hat.com,
	alexanderduyck@...com, richardcochran@...il.com, kees@...nel.org,
	gustavoars@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
	vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 4/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx_fw support

On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 09:48:12PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Maybe I should rename it like this?
> > 
> > /**
> >  * mucse_mbx_sync_fw_by_get_capability - Try to sync driver and fw
> >  * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
> >  *
> >  * mucse_mbx_sync_fw_by_get_capability tries to sync driver and fw
> >  * by get capabitiy mbx cmd. Many retrys will do if it is failed.
> >  *
> >  * Return: 0 on success, negative errno on failure
> >  **/
> > int mucse_mbx_sync_fw_by_get_capability(struct mucse_hw *hw)
> > {
> > 	struct hw_abilities ability = {};
> > 	int try_cnt = 3;
> > 	int err;
> > 	/* It is called once in probe, if failed nothing
> > 	 * (register network) todo. Try more times to get driver
> > 	 * and firmware in sync.
> > 	 */
> > 	do {
> > 		err = mucse_fw_get_capability(hw, &ability);
> > 		if (err)
> > 			continue;
> > 		break;
> > 	} while (try_cnt--);
> > 
> > 	if (!err)
> > 		hw->pfvfnum = le16_to_cpu(ability.pfnum) & GENMASK_U16(7, 0);
> > 	return err;
> > }
> 
> Why so much resistance to a NOP or firmware version, something which
> is not that important? Why do you want to combine getting sync and
> getting the capabilities?
> 
Maybe like this? 
mucse_mbx_sync_fw is called in probe with try_cnt. 
mucse_mbx_get_info is the same as old mucse_mbx_get_capability.
One function one purpose, not combine two.

static int mucse_mbx_get_info(struct mucse_hw *hw)
{
        struct mbx_fw_cmd_reply reply = {};
        struct mbx_fw_cmd_req req = {};
        struct hw_info info = {};
        int err;

        build_get_fw_info_req(&req);
        err = mucse_fw_send_cmd_wait(hw, &req, &reply);
        if (!err) {
                memcpy(&info, &reply.hw_info, sizeof(struct hw_info));
                hw->pfvfnum = le16_to_cpu(info.pfnum) & GENMASK_U16(7, 0);
        }

        return err;
}

/**
 * mucse_mbx_sync_fw - Try to sync with fw
 * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
 *
 * mucse_mbx_sync_fw tries get sync to fw hw.
 * It is only called in probe
 *
 * Return: 0 on success, negative errno on failure
 **/
int mucse_mbx_sync_fw(struct mucse_hw *hw)
{
        int try_cnt = 3;
        int err;

        do {
                err = mucse_mbx_get_info(hw);
                if (err == -ETIMEDOUT)
                        continue;
                break;
        } while (try_cnt--);

        return err;
}