netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: consider PHY_IGNORE_INTERRUPT in state machine PHY

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: <20180531.212616.129115220944192049.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Thu, 31 May 2018 21:26:16 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     hkallweit1@...il.com
Cc:     f.fainelli@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: consider PHY_IGNORE_INTERRUPT in
 state machine PHY_NOLINK handling

From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 22:13:20 +0200

> We can bail out immediately also in case of PHY_IGNORE_INTERRUPT because
> phy_mac_interupt() informs us once the link is up.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>

When state is PHY_NOLINK, the phy_mac_interrupt() code paths
will change the state to PHY_CHANGELINK before queueing up
the state machine invocation.

So I can't even see how we can enter phy_state_machine with
->state == PHY_NOLINK is the mac interrupt paths are being
used properly.

Therefore it looks like the code as written is harmless.

Did you actually hit a problem with this test or is this
a change based purely upon code inspection?