netdev - Re: [PATCH for-next V1 1/2] net/mlx5: Fix mlx5 ifc cmd_hca

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: <20160413174820.GC28411@obsidianresearch.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:48:20 -0600
From:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To:	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
	Tal Alon <talal@...lanox.com>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next V1 1/2] net/mlx5: Fix mlx5 ifc cmd_hca_cap bad
 offsets

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 07:11:03PM +0300, Saeed Mahameed wrote:

> Fixes: b0844444590e ("net/mlx5_core: Introduce access function to read internal timer ")
> Fixes: b4ff3a36d3e4 ("net/mlx5: Use offset based reserved field names in the IFC header file")

Are you sure those are right? b0844444590e doesn't have the
reserved_at names.

>  	u8         ets[0x1];
>  	u8         nic_flow_table[0x1];
>  	u8         eswitch_flow_table[0x1];
> -	u8	   early_vf_enable;
> -	u8         reserved_at_1a8[0x2];
> +	u8	   early_vf_enable[0x1];
> +	u8         reserved_at_1a9[0x2];

You know, the reserved_XXX just need to have unique unchanging
numbers, it doesn't matter what the numbers are - but you have to stop
changing them :( That is the key to avoiding conflicts when
backporting/merging/etc.

I guess the big rename has already landed, but simply stopping the
practice of renumbing the reserved fields would have been enough.

Jason