netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Fix marvell_set_downshift() from clobbering MSCR register

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: <CAL20LWKM_yX4Dxjt6nxSosr5hTKmOi4eurGy1mCfw6hUUenprg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Mar 2020 22:14:08 +0800
From:   Darell Tan <darell.tan@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        hkallweit1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Fix marvell_set_downshift() from clobbering
 MSCR register

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 2:45 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Darell Tan <darell.tan@...il.com>
> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 22:41:38 +0800
>
> > Fix marvell_set_downshift() from clobbering MSCR register.
> >
> > A typo in marvell_set_downshift() clobbers the MSCR register. This
> > register also shares settings with the auto MDI-X detection, set by
> > marvell_set_polarity(). In the 1116R init, downshift is set after
> > polarity, causing the polarity settings to be clobbered.
> >
> > This bug is present on the 5.4 series and was introduced in commit
> > 6ef05eb73c8f ("net: phy: marvell: Refactor setting downshift into a
> > helper"). This patch need not be forward-ported to 5.5 because the
> > functions were rewritten.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Darell Tan <darell.tan@...il.com>
>
> I don't see marvell_set_downshift() in 'net' nor 'net-next'.

This patch applies to the 5.4.x long term series and earlier, but not
to -stable or -next because the affected functions have already been
refactored.

Sorry I'm new to this. Should I be incorporating Andrew's comments and
sending a v2 to the linux-kernel list instead?

Thanks.