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:   Tue, 3 Aug 2021 00:00:06 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>
Cc:     Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Eric Woudstra <ericwouds@...il.com>,
        René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>,
        Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v2 3/4] net: dsa: mt7530: set STP state also on
 filter ID 1

On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:58:10PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 06:42:26PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 11:31:29PM +0800, DENG Qingfang wrote:
> > > The current code only sets FID 0's STP state. This patch sets both 0's and
> > > 1's states.
> > >
> > > The *5 part is binary magic. [1:0] is FID 0's state, [3:2] is FID 1's state
> > > and so on. Since 5 == 4'b0101, the value in [1:0] is copied to [3:2] after
> > > the multiplication.
> > >
> > > Perhaps I should only change FID 1's state.
> >
> > Keep the patches dumb for us mortals please.
> > If you only change FID 1's state, I am concerned that the driver no
> > longer initializes FID 0's port state, and might leave that to the
> > default set by other pre-kernel initialization stage (bootloader?).
> > So even if you might assume that standalone ports are FORWARDING, they
> > might not be.
>
> The default value is forwarding, and the switch is reset by the driver
> so any pre-kernel initialization stage is no more.

So then change the port STP state only for FID 1 and resend. Any other
reason why this patch series is marked RFC? It looked okay to me otherwise.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists