netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/fsl: xgmac_mdio: Add workaround for erratum A-009885

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:   Mon, 17 Jan 2022 15:00:41 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@...dekranz.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, madalin.bucur@....com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
        paulus@...ba.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/fsl: xgmac_mdio: Add workaround for erratum
 A-009885

On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 08:24:22AM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 23:02, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 10:15:26PM +0100, Tobias Waldekranz wrote:
> >> Once an MDIO read transaction is initiated, we must read back the data
> >> register within 16 MDC cycles after the transaction completes. Outside
> >> of this window, reads may return corrupt data.
> >> 
> >> Therefore, disable local interrupts in the critical section, to
> >> maximize the probability that we can satisfy this requirement.
> >
> > Since this is for net, a Fixes: tag would be nice. Maybe that would be
> > for the commit which added this driver, or maybe when the DTSI files
> > for the SOCs which have this errata we added?
> 
> Alright, I wasn't sure how to tag WAs for errata since it is more about
> the hardware than the driver.

The tag gives the backporter an idea how far back to go. If support
for this SoC has only recently been added, there is no need to
backport a long way. If it is an old SoC, then maybe more effort
should be put into the backport?

> Should I send a v2 even if nothing else
> pops up, or is this more of a if-you're-sending-a-v2-anyway type of
> comment?

If you reply with a Fixes: patchwork will automagically append it like
it does Reviewed-by, Tested-by etc.

   Andrew