netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v5] net: macb: Fix several edge cases in validate

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:   Thu, 4 Nov 2021 11:08:29 -0400
From:   Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>
To:     Parshuram Raju Thombare <pthombar@...ence.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Milind Parab <mparab@...ence.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
        Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5] net: macb: Fix several edge cases in validate



On 11/3/21 6:14 AM, Parshuram Raju Thombare wrote:
> Hi Sean,
> 
> Thanks for this improvement.
> 
>>+	if (!macb_is_gem(bp) ||
>>+	    (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_GIGABIT_MODE_AVAILABLE)) {
>>+		have_1g = true;
>>+		if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_PCS)
>>+			have_sgmii = true;
>>+		if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_HIGH_SPEED)
>>+			have_10g = true;
> 
> As I understand, MACB_CAPS_GIGABIT_MODE_AVAILABLE is used as a quirk in configs
> to prevent giga bit operation support, Nicolas should have more information about this.
> 
> macb_is_gem() tells whether giga bit operations is supported by HW, MACB_CAPS_PCS indicate
> whether PCS is included in the design (needed for SGMII and 10G operation), MACB_CAPS_HIGH_SPEED
> indicate if design supports 10G operation.
> 
> I believe this should be
> 
>>+	if (macb_is_gem(bp) &&
>>+	    (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_GIGABIT_MODE_AVAILABLE)) {
>>+		have_1g = true;
>>+		if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_PCS)
>>+			have_sgmii = true;
>>+		if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_HIGH_SPEED)
>>+			have_10g = true;

Ah, you are correct. It seems I forgot to invert this condition.

--Sean