[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170801132728.GA23157@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:27:28 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Egil Hjelmeland <privat@...l-hjelmeland.no>
Cc: Juergen Borleis <jbe@...gutronix.de>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/3] net: dsa: lan9303: define
LAN9303_NUM_PORTS 3
On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 02:31:44PM +0200, Egil Hjelmeland wrote:
> On 01. aug. 2017 13:49, Juergen Borleis wrote:
> >Hi Egil,
> >
> >On Tuesday 01 August 2017 13:14:38 Egil Hjelmeland wrote:
> >>Will be used instead of '3' in upcomming patches.
> >>
> >>
> >>+#define LAN9303_NUM_PORTS 3
> >>+
> >
> >Maybe we should put this macro into a shared location because
> >in "net/dsa/tag_lan9303.c" there is already a "#define LAN9303_MAX_PORTS
> >3".
> >
> >jb
> >
>
> Is there any suitable shared location for such driver specific
> definitions?
> I could change the name to LAN9303_MAX_PORTS so it the same.
> Rhymes better with DSA_MAX_PORTS too.
Hi Egil, Juergen
The other tag drivers do:
if (source_port >= ds->num_ports || !ds->ports[source_port].netdev)
return NULL;
or just
if (!ds->ports[port].netdev)
return NULL;
The first version is the safest, since a malicious switch could return
port 42, and you are accessing way off the end of ds->ports[]. It does
however require you call dsa_switch_alloc() with the correct number of
ports.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists