netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v7 4/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxxx: Add RMU functionality.

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:   Fri, 9 Sep 2022 08:05:20 +0200
From:   Mattias Forsblad <mattias.forsblad@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 4/6] net: dsa: mv88e6xxxx: Add RMU
 functionality.

On 2022-09-09 03:36, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> +
>> +	dsa_switch_inband_complete(ds, NULL);
>> +}
>> +
>> +int mv88e6xxx_rmu_setup(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip)
>> +{
>> +	mutex_init(&chip->rmu.mutex);
>> +
>> +	/* Remember original ops for restore */
>> +	chip->rmu.smi_ops = chip->smi_ops;
>> +
>> +	/* Change rmu ops with our own pointer */
>> +	chip->rmu.rmu_ops = (struct mv88e6xxx_bus_ops *)chip->rmu.smi_ops;
> 
> Why do you need a cast? In general, casts are wrong, it suggests your
> types are wrong.
>

So we want want to have the original ops from chip->smi_ops as
we cannot know which ones they are (mv88e6xxx_smi_dual_direct_ops/
mv88e6xxx_smi_direct_ops/mv88e6xxx_smi_indirect_ops). This is to be
able to restore them when appropriate. They are declared const. 
But we want to replace get_rmon in our own version of ops
with mv88e6xxx_rmu_stats_get, hence that version cannot be const.

/Mattias
 
>> +	chip->rmu.rmu_ops->get_rmon = mv88e6xxx_rmu_stats_get;
>> +
>> +	if (chip->info->ops->rmu_disable)
>> +		return chip->info->ops->rmu_disable(chip);
> 
> Why is a setup function calling disable?
> 
>     Andrew