netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 06/11] net: ieee802154: at86rf230: Rename the asynchronous error helper

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAB_54W440CbmB4c6FqZ_8PR-iZASK2dq-jAujnVxiiXOMGvDXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Apr 2022 08:22:25 -0400
From:   Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
        linux-wpan - ML <linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Girault <david.girault@...vo.com>,
        Romuald Despres <romuald.despres@...vo.com>,
        Frederic Blain <frederic.blain@...vo.com>,
        Nicolas Schodet <nico@...fr.eu.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/11] net: ieee802154: at86rf230: Rename the
 asynchronous error helper

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 4:05 AM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> alex.aring@...il.com wrote on Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:57:41 -0400:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 11:34 AM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In theory there are two distinct error path:
> > > - The bus error when forwarding a packet to the transceiver fails.
> > > - The transmitter error, after the transmission has been offloaded.
> > >
> > > Right now in this driver only the former situation is properly handled,
> > > so rename the different helpers to reflect this situation before
> > > improving the support of the other path.
> > >
> >
> > I have no idea what I should think about this patch.
> >
> > On the driver layer there only exists "bus errors" okay, whatever
> > error because spi_async() returns an error and we try to recover from
> > it. Also async_error() will be called when there is a timeout because
> > the transceiver took too long for some state change... In this case
> > most often this async_error() is called if spi_async() returns an
> > error but as I said it's not always the case (e.g. timeout)... it is
> > some kind of hardware issue (indicated by 802.15.4 SYSTEM_ERROR for
> > upper layer) and probably if it occurs we can't recover anyway from it
> > (maybe rfkill support can do it, which does a whole transceiver reset
> > routine, but this is always user triggered so far I know).
> >
> > However if you want that patch in that's it's fine for me, but for me
> > this if somebody looks closely into the code it's obvious that in most
> > cases it's called when spi_async() returns an error (which is not
> > always the case see timeout).
>
> I thought it would clarify the situation but I overlooked the timeout
> situation. Actually I did wrote it before understanding what was wrong
> with the patch coming next (I assume my new approach is fine?), and
> the two changes are fully independent, so I'll drop this patch too.
>

new patch is perfect, I like hw_error().

- Alex