netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: LAG fixes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210115161310.19074386@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jan 2021 16:13:10 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        andrew@...n.ch, vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: LAG fixes

On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 01:55:47 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 03:46:22PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 01:24:35 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:  
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 03:02:46PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:  
> > > > On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 13:52:57 +0100 Tobias Waldekranz wrote:  
> > > > > The kernel test robot kindly pointed out that Global 2 support in
> > > > > mv88e6xxx is optional.
> > > > >
> > > > > This also made me realize that we should verify that the hardware
> > > > > actually supports LAG offloading before trying to configure it.
> > > > >
> > > > > v1 -> v2:
> > > > > - Do not allocate LAG ID mappings on unsupported hardware (Vladimir).
> > > > > - Simplify _has_lag predicate (Vladimir).  
> > > >
> > > > If I'm reading the discussion on v1 right there will be a v3,
> > > > LMK if I got it wrong.  
> > >
> > > I don't think a v3 was supposed to be coming, what made you think that?  
> >
> > I thought you concluded that the entire CONFIG_NET_DSA_MV88E6XXX_GLOBAL2
> > should go, you said:
> >  
> > > So, roughly, you save 10%/13k. That hardly justifies the complexity IMO.  
> 
> That would be the first time that I hear of fixing a build failure due
> to a missing shim by refactoring a driver... Punctual issue, punctual
> fix, no?

Sure, without knowing the driver it's hard to tell if it's a matter of
removing those stubs in the header, or more work, hence the question. 

Applied now, thanks!