netdev - Re: [PATCH] ravb: implement MTU change while device is up

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: <20190509101020.4ozvazptoy53gh55@verge.net.au>
Date:   Thu, 9 May 2019 12:10:21 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To:     Ulrich Hecht <uli@...nd.eu>
Cc:     Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund@...natech.se>,
        Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
        Ulrich Hecht <uli+renesas@...nd.eu>,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, wsa@...-dreams.de, magnus.damm@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ravb: implement MTU change while device is up

On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 08:57:44AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> 
> > On May 8, 2019 at 6:52 PM Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund@...natech.se> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Sergei,
> > 
> > On 2019-05-08 18:59:01 +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > > 
> > > On 05/08/2019 06:21 PM, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Uses the same method as various other drivers: shut the device down,
> > > > change the MTU, then bring it back up again.
> > > > 
> > > > Tested on Renesas D3 Draak board.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ulrich Hecht <uli+renesas@...nd.eu>
> > > 
> > >    You should have CC'ed me (as an reviewer for the Renesas drivers).
> 
> Sorry, will do next time.
> 
> > > 
> > >    How about the code below instead?
> > > 
> > > 	if (netif_running(ndev))
> > > 		ravb_close(ndev);
> > > 
> > >  	ndev->mtu = new_mtu;
> > > 	netdev_update_features(ndev);
> > 
> > Is there a need to call netdev_update_features() even if the if is not 
> > running?
> 
> In my testing, it didn't seem so.

That may be because your testing doesn't cover cases where it would make
any difference.