netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: drop field "tail" of struct igb

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <58216BBE.5000108@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Nov 2016 14:07:58 +0800
From:   Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
To:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Izumi, Taku/泉 拓 
        <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] igb: drop field "tail" of struct
 igb_ring



On 11/08/2016 12:12 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, November 7, 2016, Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com
> <mailto:caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>> wrote:
>
>

>
> We removed head because it isn't really accessed very often, it is only
> really used for when the ring is configured.  Tail is accessed every
> time we add a descriptor to a ring.  The pointer chasing from ring to
> netdev to adapter to hw is expensive.  That is one of the rasons why
> we cache the pointer to the tail register.

I see. I can submit the patch as you suggested.

>
>             Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
>             ---
>                drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb.h      |  1 -
>                drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c | 16
>             +++++++++-------

>
>     hw->hw_addr could be alterred to NULL(in igb_rd32), this is why
>     writel oops the kernel, you give a fine solution.
>
>     But from the oops message, we can find, register reading returns all
>     F's, I also have a question want to consult: when igb device is
>     reset, would reading register(no matter config space or non-PCIe
>     configuration registers) during reset returns all F's? (I guess this
>     is the core of my issue)
>
>
> An all F's value means the read failed.  The device is likely off of the
> bus and the hw_addr may not have been repopulated after the reset.
>
> You might want to check the mailing list as I thought someone had
> submitted a patch recently for one of the drivers to repopulate hw_addr
> after a reset.
>

I guess you are saying this one:
   http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/689592/

Seems they have a similar issue with me.


-- 
Yours Sincerely,

Cao jin