netdev - Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB implementation

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]

Message-ID: <864c4ae8e549721ba1ac5cf6ef77db9d@kapio-technology.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:36:38 +0100
From:   netdev@...io-technology.com
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB
 implementation

On 2022-11-15 10:58, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 09:37:48PM +0100, Hans J. Schultz wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c 
>> b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
>> index 8a874b6fc8e1..0a57f4e7dd46 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
>> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>> 
>>  #include "chip.h"
>>  #include "global1.h"
>> +#include "switchdev.h"
>> 
>>  /* Offset 0x01: ATU FID Register */
>> 
>> @@ -426,6 +427,8 @@ static irqreturn_t 
>> mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>  	if (err)
>>  		goto out;
>> 
>> +	mv88e6xxx_reg_unlock(chip);
> 
> Why? At minimum such a change needs to be explained in the commit
> message and probably split to a separate preparatory patch, assuming 
> the
> change is actually required.

This was a change done long time ago related to that the violation 
handle function takes the NL lock,
which could lead to a double-lock deadlock afair if the chip lock is 
taken throughout the handler.