linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/9] hinic3: Add PF management interfaces

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: <aO_P8F3CuY4ZvmiY@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:46:40 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Fan Gong <gongfan1@...wei.com>, Zhu Yikai <zhuyikai1@...artners.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
	Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Gur Stavi <gur.stavi@...wei.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>, Lee Trager <lee@...ger.us>,
	luosifu@...wei.com, luoyang82@...artners.com,
	Meny Yossefi <meny.yossefi@...wei.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
	Shen Chenyang <shenchenyang1@...ilicon.com>,
	Shi Jing <shijing34@...wei.com>, Suman Ghosh <sumang@...vell.com>,
	Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
	Wu Like <wulike1@...wei.com>, Xin Guo <guoxin09@...wei.com>,
	Zhou Shuai <zhoushuai28@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/9] hinic3: Add PF management interfaces

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 12:00:33PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > To: Fan Gong …
> 
> Please reconsider the distribution of recipient information between message fields
> once more.
> 
> 
> …
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/huawei/hinic3/hinic3_mgmt.c
> > @@ -3,19 +3,325 @@
> …
> > +static void mgmt_resp_msg_handler(struct hinic3_msg_pf_to_mgmt *pf_to_mgmt,
> > +				  struct hinic3_recv_msg *recv_msg)
> > +{
> …
> > +	spin_lock(&pf_to_mgmt->sync_event_lock);
> > +	if (recv_msg->msg_id != pf_to_mgmt->sync_msg_id) {
> …
> > +	}
> > +	spin_unlock(&pf_to_mgmt->sync_event_lock);
> > +}
> …
> 
> Will development interests grow to apply a call like “scoped_guard(spinlock, &pf_to_mgmt->sync_event_lock)”?
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.17.1/source/include/linux/spinlock.h#L565-L567

Hi Markus, all.

It's up to the developer. But there is a still a weak preference
for open-coding, as is done above, in Networking code. So in the
absence of some other motivation (I have not reviewed this code)
I would suggest leaving this as-is.

https://docs.kernel.org/process/maintainer-netdev.html#using-device-managed-and-cleanup-h-constructs