netdev - RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 2/8] igb: Fix queue selection on MAC filters on i210 and i211

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: <87woyewovq.fsf@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:25:29 -0700
From:   Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
To:     "Brown\, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>,
        "intel-wired-lan\@lists.osuosl.org" 
        <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>
Cc:     "netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Sanchez-Palencia\, Jesus" <jesus.sanchez-palencia@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [Intel-wired-lan] [next-queue PATCH v4 2/8] igb: Fix queue selection on MAC filters on i210 and i211

Hi,

"Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com> writes:

>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c
>> @@ -8747,12 +8747,19 @@ static void igb_rar_set_index(struct igb_adapter
>> *adapter, u32 index)
>>  		if (is_valid_ether_addr(addr))
>>  			rar_high |= E1000_RAH_AV;
>> 
>> -		if (hw->mac.type == e1000_82575)
>> +		switch (hw->mac.type) {
>> +		case e1000_82575:
>> +		case e1000_i210:
>> +		case e1000_i211:
>> +			rar_high |= E1000_RAH_QSEL_ENABLE;
>>  			rar_high |= E1000_RAH_POOL_1 *
>> -				    adapter->mac_table[index].queue;
>> -		else
>> +				      adapter->mac_table[index].queue;
>> +			break;
>> +		default:
>>  			rar_high |= E1000_RAH_POOL_1 <<
>> -				    adapter->mac_table[index].queue;
>> +				adapter->mac_table[index].queue;
>
> Small nit.  Shouldn't this line be indented more to be a few spaces
> past the "|=" operator as above?

I don't know why my editor seemed to disagree, I will fix.


Thank you,
--
Vinicius