netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/2] net: stmmac: Coalesce and tail addr fixes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181219120245.GA5205@centauri.lan>
Date:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 13:02:45 +0100
From:   Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...aro.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, narmstrong@...libre.com,
        jbrunet@...libre.com, martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com,
        Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com, peppe.cavallaro@...com,
        alexandre.torgue@...com, vinod.koul@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] net: stmmac: Coalesce and tail addr fixes

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 07:48:46PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> 
> From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>
> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 09:22:55 +0100
> 
> > The fix for coalesce timer and a fix in tail address setting that impacts
> > XGMAC2 operation.
> > 
> > The series is:
> > 	Tested-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
> > 	on a113 s400 board (single queue)
> 
> Series applied and queued up for -stable.

Hello David, Jose,

While it says that the series was queued up for -stable, only patch 2/2:
0431100b3d82 ("net: stmmac: Fixup the tail addr setting in xmit path")
was queued up for 4.14 stable.

patch 1/2:
8fce33317023 ("net: stmmac: Rework coalesce timer and fix multi-queue races")
is missing in 4.14 stable, even though the fixes tag refers to a commit
that was first included in v4.12.

Patch 1/2 does not apply without conflicts.
However, since this fixes multi-queue races, and appears to fix the irq
coalescing implementation that has been giving us problems in the past:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/24/571
I suggest that we try to get this backported.
If the conflicts are non-trivial, perhaps Jose can help with the backport
to 4.14 stable?

Kind regards,
Niklas