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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <19b9e05e-f750-8bb5-542e-6e9590812c3c@ti.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 10:29:57 +0530 From: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@...com> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kishon@...com>, <vigneshr@...com>, <grygorii.strashko@...com>, <s-vadapalli@...com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: ethernet: ti: am65-cpsw: Fix devlink port register sequence Hello Jakub, On 06/07/22 07:09, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 13:00:40 +0530 Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: >> @@ -2527,6 +2527,10 @@ static int am65_cpsw_nuss_register_ndevs(struct am65_cpsw_common *common) >> return ret; >> } >> >> + ret = am65_cpsw_nuss_register_devlink(common); >> + if (ret) >> + goto err_cleanup_ndev; >> + >> for (i = 0; i < common->port_num; i++) { >> port = &common->ports[i]; >> >> @@ -2539,23 +2543,21 @@ static int am65_cpsw_nuss_register_ndevs(struct am65_cpsw_common *common) >> i, ret); >> goto err_cleanup_ndev; >> } >> + >> + dl_port = &port->devlink_port; >> + devlink_port_type_eth_set(dl_port, port->ndev); >> } >> >> ret = am65_cpsw_register_notifiers(common); >> if (ret) >> goto err_cleanup_ndev; >> >> - ret = am65_cpsw_nuss_register_devlink(common); >> - if (ret) >> - goto clean_unregister_notifiers; >> - >> /* can't auto unregister ndev using devm_add_action() due to >> * devres release sequence in DD core for DMA >> */ >> >> return 0; >> -clean_unregister_notifiers: >> - am65_cpsw_unregister_notifiers(common); >> + >> err_cleanup_ndev: >> am65_cpsw_nuss_cleanup_ndev(common); > > No additions to the error handling path? Slightly suspicious. > Do the devlink ports not have to be removed if netdev registration > fails? Thank you for pointing it out. I had missed adding the cleanup for the register devlink function call. I will add it and post the v3 patch. Regards, Siddharth.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists