netdev - Re: [PATCH 00/20] ethernet: ucc_geth: assorted fixes and simplifications

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 5 Dec 2020 22:11:39 +0100
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/20] ethernet: ucc_geth: assorted fixes and
 simplifications

On 05/12/2020 21.53, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sat,  5 Dec 2020 20:17:23 +0100 Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>> While trying to figure out how to allow bumping the MTU with the
>> ucc_geth driver, I fell into a rabbit hole and stumbled on a whole
>> bunch of issues of varying importance - some are outright bug fixes,
>> while most are a matter of simplifying the code to make it more
>> accessible.
>>
>> At the end of digging around the code and data sheet to figure out how
>> it all works, I think the MTU issue might be fixed by a one-liner, but
>> I'm not sure it can be that simple. It does seem to work (ping -s X
>> works for larger values of X, and wireshark confirms that the packets
>> are not fragmented).
>>
>> Re patch 2, someone in NXP should check how the hardware actually
>> works and make an updated reference manual available.
> 
> Looks like a nice clean up on a quick look.
> 
> Please separate patches 1 and 11 (which are the two bug fixes I see)

I think patch 2 is a bug fix as well, but I'd like someone from NXP to
comment.

> rebase (retest) and post them against the net tree:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/

So I thought this would go through Li Yang's tree. That's where my
previous QE related patches have gone through, and at least some need
some input from NXP folks - and what MAINTAINERS suggests. So not
marking the patches with net or net-next was deliberate. But I'm happy
to rearrange and send to net/net-next as appropriate if that's what you
and Li Yang can agree to.

Thanks,
Rasmus