netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 3/3] octeontx2-pf: Add support for PTP clock

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: <CALHRZuqwAhfLhxUs4SUk8uPN=rpmstOcHewtPm35g6+ktk6F9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 18 Jul 2020 18:23:27 +0530
From:   sundeep subbaraya <sundeep.lkml@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Subbaraya Sundeep <sbhatta@...vell.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, sgoutham@...vell.com,
        Aleksey Makarov <amakarov@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 3/3] octeontx2-pf: Add support for PTP clock

Hi Jakub,

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:18 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 10:41:49 +0530 sundeep subbaraya wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:41 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:08:09 +0530 Subbaraya Sundeep wrote:
> > > > @@ -1730,10 +1745,149 @@ static void otx2_reset_task(struct work_struct *work)
> > > >       if (!netif_running(pf->netdev))
> > > >               return;
> > > >
> > > > +     rtnl_lock();
> > > >       otx2_stop(pf->netdev);
> > > >       pf->reset_count++;
> > > >       otx2_open(pf->netdev);
> > > >       netif_trans_update(pf->netdev);
> > > > +     rtnl_unlock();
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > This looks unrelated, otherwise for the patches:
> >
> > You mean the lock/unlock logic with this patch?
>
> Looks very much like a bug independent of the PTP support.
>
> Also
> $ git grep reset_task drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/
> Doesn't reveal any place where you would flush or cancel that work.
>
> > I can separate this out and put in another patch #4 if you insist.
>
> Does someone need to insist for you to fix your bugs in the current
> release cycle? That's a basic part of the kernel release process :/

My confusion was whether it is okay to modify patches after
Acked-by because reviewers have to review again.
It is clear now.

Thanks,
Sundeep