netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Remove some bureaucracy around querying the VTU

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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Mar 2021 11:17:55 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/5] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Remove some
 bureaucracy around querying the VTU

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:13:57PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> +static int mv88e6xxx_vtu_get(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip, u16 vid,
> +			     struct mv88e6xxx_vtu_entry *entry)
>  {
> +	int err;
> +
>  	if (!chip->info->ops->vtu_getnext)
>  		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  
> -	return chip->info->ops->vtu_getnext(chip, entry);
> +	entry->vid = vid - 1;

Should the vtu_get API not work with vid 0 as well? Shouldn't we
initialize entry->vid to mv88e6xxx_max_vid(chip) in that case?

> +	entry->valid = false;
> +
> +	err = chip->info->ops->vtu_getnext(chip, entry);
> +
> +	if (entry->vid != vid)
> +		entry->valid = false;
> +
> +	return err;
>  }