netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: enetc: preserve TX ring priority across reconfiguration

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: <20221123160012.k3h3og6f5tjxpjcg@skbuf>
Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 18:00:12 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: enetc: preserve TX ring priority across
 reconfiguration

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 04:51:16PM +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > +	if (err) {
> > +		for (i = 0; i < priv->num_tx_rings; i++) {
> > +			tx_ring = priv->tx_ring[i];
> > +			tx_ring->prio = taprio->enable ? 0 : i;
> 
> Side note: is that `taprio ? 0 : i` correct? It's an error path
> IIUC, why not just unconditional 0?

Yes, it is intended. On error path the priorities are restored.
If taprio->enable was false, but disabling failed, the ring priorities
need to be set as if taprio->enable was true.