netdev - Re: usbnet: smsc95xx: fix link detection for disabled autonegotiation

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]

Date:	Mon, 30 May 2016 22:07:42 +0200
From:	Christoph Fritz <chf.fritz@...glemail.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	steve.glendinning@...well.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: usbnet: smsc95xx: fix link detection for disabled
 autonegotiation

On Sun, 2016-05-29 at 22:30 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Christoph Fritz <chf.fritz@...glemail.com>
> Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 04:06:47 +0200
> 
> > @@ -1695,6 +1745,7 @@ static int smsc95xx_resume(struct usb_interface *intf)
> >  
> >  	/* do this first to ensure it's cleared even in error case */
> >  	pdata->suspend_flags = 0;
> > +	schedule_delayed_work(&pdata->carrier_check, CARRIER_CHECK_DELAY);
> 
> Why are you not cancelling this delayed work in the suspend routine of
> the driver?

I'm doing this:
+       if (pdata->suspend_flags != 0)
+               return;

inside the "worker-function" so that schedule_delayed_work() is not
called again.

Should I explicitly cancel_delayed_work() inside suspend() too?