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:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 02:21:57 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        nic_swsd@...ltek.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] r8152: fix flow control issue of RTL8156A

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 08:28:03PM +0800, Hayes Wang wrote:
> The feature of flow control becomes abnormal, if the device sends a
> pause frame and the tx/rx is disabled before sending a release frame. It
> causes the lost of packets.
> 
> Set PLA_RX_FIFO_FULL and PLA_RX_FIFO_EMPTY to zeros before disabling the
> tx/rx. And, toggle FC_PATCH_TASK before enabling tx/rx to reset the flow
> control patch and timer. Then, the hardware could clear the state and
> the flow control becomes normal after enabling tx/rx.
> 
> Fixes: 195aae321c82 ("r8152: support new chips")
> Signed-off-by: Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/usb/r8152.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c b/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> index 0fc4b959edc1..08d1786135f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/r8152.c
> @@ -5986,6 +5986,25 @@ static void rtl8153_disable(struct r8152 *tp)
>  	r8153_aldps_en(tp, true);
>  }
>  
> +static inline u32 fc_pause_on_auto(struct r8152 *tp)
> +{
> +	return (ALIGN(mtu_to_size(tp->netdev->mtu), 1024) + 6 * 1024);
> +}

No inline functions in .c files. Let the compiler decide. I see you
are just moving functions around, they were already inline, but now is
a good time to fix this.

  Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ