netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 5/7] net: dsa: avoid DT validation for drivers which provide default config

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: <db06c9d7-9ad7-42f0-9b40-6e325f6bcc62@lunn.ch>
Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 19:51:22 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 5/7] net: dsa: avoid DT validation for
 drivers which provide default config

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 12:00:16PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> When a DSA driver (e.g. mv88e6xxx) provides a default configuration,
> avoid validating the DT description as missing elements will be
> provided by the DSA driver.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
> ---
>  net/dsa/port.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/net/dsa/port.c b/net/dsa/port.c
> index c30e3a7d2145..23d9970c02d3 100644
> --- a/net/dsa/port.c
> +++ b/net/dsa/port.c
> @@ -1951,6 +1951,9 @@ static void dsa_shared_port_validate_of(struct dsa_port *dp,
>  	*missing_phy_mode = false;
>  	*missing_link_description = false;
>  
> +	if (dp->ds->ops->port_get_fwnode)
> +		return;

I wounder if you should actually call it for the given port, and
ensure it does not return -EOPNOTSUPP, or -EINVAL, etc, because it is
not going to override that port? Then the DT values should be
validated?

	Andrew