netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Make VTU miss violations less spammy

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180328193411.GC20749@lunn.ch>
Date:   Wed, 28 Mar 2018 21:34:11 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Make VTU miss
 violations less spammy

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:11:07AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 03/27/2018 02:59 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > VTU miss violations can happen under normal conditions. Don't spam the
> > kernel log. The statistics counter will indicate it is happening, if
> > anybody is interested.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> 
> Reported-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c | 6 ++----
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c
> > index 2cbaf946e7ed..e0f1b4f6e29f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_vtu.c
> > @@ -547,11 +547,9 @@ static irqreturn_t mv88e6xxx_g1_vtu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
> >  		chip->ports[spid].vtu_member_violation++;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if (val & MV88E6XXX_G1_VTU_OP_MISS_VIOLATION) {
> > -		dev_err_ratelimited(chip->dev, "VTU miss violation for vid %d, source port %d\n",
> > -				    entry.vid, spid);
> 
> Why not keep it as a dev_dbg() message?

O.K, will do.

     Andrew