[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220828061628.GA26078@pengutronix.de>
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2022 08:16:28 +0200
From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 6/7] ethtool: add interface to interact with
Ethernet Power Equipment
On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 08:38:34PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > +static int pse_set_pse_config(struct net_device *dev,
> > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack,
> > + struct nlattr **tb)
> > +{
> > + struct phy_device *phydev = dev->phydev;
> > + struct pse_control_config config = {};
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (!tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL])
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> I would make use of extack here, and report what is missing.
>
> > +
> > + config.admin_cotrol = nla_get_u8(tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL]);
>
> It would be good to have some basic validation here, make sure user
> space has passed a reasonable value.
this values are already validate by the ethnl_pse_set_policy
> You should also define what 0 and
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL_UNKNOWN means here when passed in. In
> future, there could be additional things which could be configured, so
> struct pse_control_config gets additional members.
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL appears to be mandatory, you return
> -EVINAL if missing, so if you don't want to change it, but change some
> other new thing, maybe 0 should be passed here? And the driver should
> not consider it an error?
ack. changed to 0 and added comment.
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL_UNKNOWN
> however seems invalid and so should be rejected here?
yes. it is already rejected. I added comment to make it more visible
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists