linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v10 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: <19ca3e80-97f7-428a-bf09-f713706fd6ab@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 00:45:43 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Dong Yibo <dong100@...se.com>
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 v10 4/5] net: rnpgbe: Add basic mbx_fw support

> +/**
> + * mucse_mbx_powerup - Echo fw to powerup
> + * @hw: pointer to the HW structure
> + * @is_powerup: true for powerup, false for powerdown
> + *
> + * mucse_mbx_powerup echo fw to change working frequency
> + * to normal after received true, and reduce working frequency
> + * if false.
> + *
> + * Return: 0 on success, negative errno on failure
> + **/
> +int mucse_mbx_powerup(struct mucse_hw *hw, bool is_powerup)
> +{
> +	struct mbx_fw_cmd_req req = {};
> +	int len;
> +	int err;
> +
> +	build_powerup(&req, is_powerup);
> +	len = le16_to_cpu(req.datalen);
> +	mutex_lock(&hw->mbx.lock);
> +
> +	if (is_powerup) {
> +		err = mucse_write_posted_mbx(hw, (u32 *)&req,
> +					     len);
> +	} else {
> +		err = mucse_write_mbx_pf(hw, (u32 *)&req,
> +					 len);
> +	}

It looks odd that this is asymmetric. Why is a different low level
function used between power up and power down?

> +int mucse_mbx_reset_hw(struct mucse_hw *hw)
> +{
> +	struct mbx_fw_cmd_reply reply = {};
> +	struct mbx_fw_cmd_req req = {};
> +
> +	build_reset_hw_req(&req);
> +	return mucse_fw_send_cmd_wait(hw, &req, &reply);
> +}

And this uses a third low level API different to power up and power
down?

	Andrew