netdev - Re: question about samsung/sxgbe/sxgbe

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: <20160121.110939.1823034912783648640.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:09:39 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	shuahkh@....samsung.com
Cc:	sakiwit@...il.com, siva.kallam@...adcom.com, julia.lawall@...6.fr,
	shuahkhan@...il.com, bh74.an@...sung.com, ks.giri@...sung.com,
	vipul.pandya@...sung.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: question about samsung/sxgbe/sxgbe_xpcs.c

From: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 07:04:17 -0700

> On 01/20/2016 10:10 PM, Jεan Sacren wrote:
>> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:36:28 -0500
>>>
>>> From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
>>> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 19:54:20 +0100 (CET)
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>>>> I just wondered.  I was looking at dependencies between networking files.
>>>> This one stands out because nothing is dependenton it, even the files it
>>>> is compiled with, and it doesn't contain the usual functions,
>>>> register_netdev, etc.
>>>
>>> Even with that explanation, this is a bogus situation.
>>>
>>> There are no in-tree callers of this code.  It should be removed until there
>>> are in-tree users.
>>>
>>> Nobody can figure out if the interface for this is done properly without seeing
>>> the call sites and how they work.  It is therefore impossible to review this
>>> code and judge it's design.
>>>
>>> If someone doesn't send me a removal patch, I will remove this code myself.
>> 
>> I have the patch ready.
>> 
>> Do you want me to submit it now during the merge window or wait till
>> net-next opens up again?
>> 
> 
> My second attempt to locate the author for a comment
> on this before it gets removed. Maybe this code could
> be fixed just in case it is important for some product
> out there.
> 
> I am cc'ing the original author in case he has any
> comments.

It never should have been added in the first place, I really don't
care at all right now what it's used for.

The simple fact is that it isn't used, and therefore must be removed
now.