netdev - RE: [PATCH] stmmac: Discard masked flags in interrupt status register

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: <4881796E12491D4BB15146FE0209CE64678ACDB7@DE02WEMBXB.internal.synopsys.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Feb 2017 20:22:22 +0000
From:   Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "peppe.cavallaro@...com" <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        "fabrice.gasnier@...com" <fabrice.gasnier@...com>,
        "manabian@...il.com" <manabian@...il.com>,
        "preid@...ctromag.com.au" <preid@...ctromag.com.au>,
        "alexandre.torgue@...il.com" <alexandre.torgue@...il.com>,
        Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] stmmac: Discard masked flags in interrupt status
 register

Hi David, all,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 2:16 AM
> To: Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> peppe.cavallaro@...com; fabrice.gasnier@...com; manabian@...il.com;
> preid@...ctromag.com.au; alexandre.torgue@...il.com;
> Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] stmmac: Discard masked flags in interrupt status
> register
> 
> From: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:24:43 +0300
> 
> > DW GMAC databook says the following about bits in "Register 15
> > (Interrupt Mask Register)":
> > --------------------------->8-------------------------
> > When set, this bit __disables_the_assertion_of_the_interrupt_signal__
> > because of the setting of XXX bit in Register 14 (Interrupt Status
> > Register).
> > --------------------------->8-------------------------
> >
> > In fact even if we mask one bit in the mask register it doesn't
> > prevent corresponding bit to appear in the status register, it only
> > disables interrupt generation for corresponding event.
> >
> > But currently we expect a bit different behavior: status bits to be in
> > sync with their masks, i.e. if mask for bit A is set in the mask
> > register then bit A won't appear in the interrupt status register.
> >
> > This was proven to be incorrect assumption, see discussion here [1].
> > That misunderstanding causes unexpected behaviour of the GMAC, for
> > example we were happy enough to just see bogus messages about link
> > state changes.
> >
> > So from now on we'll be only checking bits that really may trigger an
> > interrupt.
> >
> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/3/413
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@...opsys.com>
> 
> This looks good, applied, thanks.

May we have that one back-ported to stable branches starting from 4.8.x?

That issue started to appear due to a change from pr_debug() to pr_info() in commit
70523e639bf8 ("drivers: net: stmmac: reworking the PCS code.").

-Alexey