netdev - Re: [PATCH v13 net-next 05/15] net: mvpp2: add PPv23 version definition

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: <20210211114238.GD1463@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:42:38 +0000
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     stefanc@...vell.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, nadavh@...vell.com, ymarkman@...vell.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org, mw@...ihalf.com,
        andrew@...n.ch, atenart@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
        gregory.clement@...tlin.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 net-next 05/15] net: mvpp2: add PPv23 version
 definition

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 12:48:52PM +0200, stefanc@...vell.com wrote:
> From: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> 
> This patch add PPv23 version definition.
> PPv23 is new packet processor in CP115.
> Everything that supported by PPv22, also supported by PPv23.
> No functional changes in this stage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> Acked-by: Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>

Reviewed-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>

> @@ -7049,6 +7049,11 @@ static int mvpp2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			priv->port_map |= BIT(i);
>  	}
>  
> +	if (priv->hw_version != MVPP21) {
> +		if (mvpp2_read(priv, MVPP2_VER_ID_REG) == MVPP2_VER_PP23)
> +			priv->hw_version = MVPP23;
> +	}
> +

The only minor comment I have on this is... the formatting of the
above. Wouldn't:

	if (priv->hw_version >= MVPP22 &&
	    mvpp2_read(priv, MVPP2_VER_ID_REG) == MVPP2_VER_PP23)
		priv->hw_version = MVPP23;

read better?

Do we need to even check priv->hw_version here? Isn't this register
implemented in PPv2.1 where it contains the value zero?

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!