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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 02:45:14 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/7] net: dsa: Register devlink ports before calling DSA driver setup() > > +static int dsa_port_devlink_setup(struct dsa_port *dp) > > { > > struct devlink_port *dlp = &dp->devlink_port; > > + struct dsa_switch_tree *dst = dp->ds->dst; > > + struct devlink_port_attrs attrs = {}; > > + struct devlink *dl = dp->ds->devlink; > > + const unsigned char *id; > > + unsigned char len; > > + int err; > > + > > + id = (const unsigned char *)&dst->index; > > + len = sizeof(dst->index); > > + > > + attrs.phys.port_number = dp->index; > > + memcpy(attrs.switch_id.id, id, len); > > + attrs.switch_id.id_len = len; > > + > > + if (dp->setup) > > + return 0; > > > > I wonder what this is protecting against? I ran on a multi-switch tree > without these 2 lines and I didn't get anything like multiple > registration or things like that. What is the call path that would call > dsa_port_devlink_setup twice? I made a duplicate copy of dsa_port_setup() and trimmed out what was not needed to give the new dsa_port_setup() and dsa_port_devlink_setup(). I did not trim enough... > > > + switch (dp->type) { > > + case DSA_PORT_TYPE_UNUSED: > > + memset(dlp, 0, sizeof(*dlp)); > > + attrs.flavour = DEVLINK_PORT_FLAVOUR_UNUSED; > > > + devlink_port_attrs_set(dlp, &attrs); > > + err = devlink_port_register(dl, dlp, dp->index); > > These 2 lines are common everywhere. Could you move them out of the > switch-case statement? Yes, that makes sense. Too much blind copy/paste without actually reviewing the code afterwards. Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists