netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 net] r8169: work around RTL8125 UDP hw bug

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: <CAF=yD-+MdpFQZ8+M5hQaHMODUhAg9FadTm5ck2wu9C=4We9=OA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jan 2021 17:16:39 -0500
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net] r8169: work around RTL8125 UDP hw bug

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:02 PM Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com> wrote:
>
> It was reported that on RTL8125 network breaks under heavy UDP load,
> e.g. torrent traffic ([0], from comment 27). Realtek confirmed a hw bug
> and provided me with a test version of the r8125 driver including a
> workaround. Tests confirmed that the workaround fixes the issue.
> I modified the original version of the workaround to meet mainline
> code style.
>
> [0] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209839
>
> v2:
> - rebased to net
> v3:
> - make rtl_skb_is_udp() more robust and use skb_header_pointer()
>   to access the ip(v6) header
> v4:
> - remove dependency on ptp_classify.h
> - replace magic number with offsetof(struct udphdr, len)
>
> Fixes: f1bce4ad2f1c ("r8169: add support for RTL8125")
> Tested-by: xplo <xplo.bn@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>

Acked-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>

Thanks for the quick iterations. I was afraid that the switch with
implicit fall-through to the default label could trigger
Wimplicit-fallthrough, but it seems that warning is suppressed if the
case only has a break or return. It's not strictly needed in that
case, but no need to respin just for that, either.