netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: do not call phy_ethtool_ksettings

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]

Date:   Wed, 07 Dec 2016 13:09:14 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     niklas.cassel@...s.com
Cc:     peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com, niklass@...s.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: do not call phy_ethtool_ksettings_set
 from atomic context

From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:47:15 +0100

> From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
> 
> From what I can tell, spin_lock(&priv->lock) is not needed, since the
> phy_ethtool_ksettings_set call is not given the priv struct.
> 
> phy_start_aneg takes the phydev->lock. Calls to phy_adjust_link
> from phy_state_machine also takes the phydev->lock.
...
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>

Applied, but please always be explicit about what tree you are targetting
this patch by properly annotating for it in your Subject line.

In this case that would be "Subject: [PATCH net-next] ..."