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  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]
Date:   Mon, 13 Jul 2020 17:12:17 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <>
To:     Richard Cochran <>
Cc:     Kurt Kanzenbach <>, Andrew Lunn <>,
        Vivien Didelot <>,
        Florian Fainelli <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,,
        Rob Herring <>,,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
        Kamil Alkhouri <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/8] net: dsa: hellcreek: Add support for hardware

On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 07:01:12AM -0700, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 12:57:34PM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> > > I would like to get some clarification on whether "SKBTX_IN_PROGRESS"
> > > should be set in shtx->tx_flags or not. On one hand, it's asking for
> > > trouble, on the other hand, it's kind of required for proper compliance
> > > to API pre-SO_TIMESTAMPING...
> > 
> > Hm. We actually oriented our code on the mv88e6xxx time stamping code base.
> Where in mv88e6xxx does the driver set SKBTX_IN_PROGRESS?

That's the point, it doesn't, and neither does hellcreek.

> I don't think it makes sense for DSA drivers to set this bit, as it
> serves no purpose in the DSA context.

For whom does this bit serve a purpose, though, and how do you tell?

> Thanks,
> Richard


Powered by blists - more mailing lists