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: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 20:58:33 +0300
From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
 Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@...iatek.com>, DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
 Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
 Bartel Eerdekens <bartel.eerdekens@...stell8.be>, mithat.guner@...ont.com,
 erkin.bozoglu@...ont.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with
 multiple CPU ports on MT7530

On 13.06.2023 20:39, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:30:28PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>> That fixes port 5 on certain variants of the MT7530 switch, as it was
>> already working on the other variants, which, in conclusion, fixes port 5 on
>> all MT7530 variants.
> 
> Ok. I didn't pay enough attention to the commit message.
> 
>> And no, trapping works. Having only CPU port 5 defined on the devicetree
>> will cause the CPU_PORT bits to be set to port 5. There's only a problem
>> when multiple CPU ports are defined.
> 
> Got it. Then this is really not a problem, and the commit message frames
> it incorrectly.

Actually this patch fixes the issue it describes. At the state of this 
patch, when multiple CPU ports are defined, port 5 is the active CPU 
port, CPU_PORT bits are set to port 6.

Once "the patch that prefers port 6, I could easily find the exact name 
but your mail snipping makes it hard" is applied, this issue becomes 
redundant.

> 
>>> So how about settling on that as a more modest Fixes: tag, and
>>> explaining clearly in the commit message what's affected?
>>
>> I don't see anything to change in the patch log except addressing Russell's
>> comments.
> 
> Ok. I see Russell has commented on v4, though I don't see that he particularly
> pointed out that this fixes a problem which isn't yet a problem. I got lost in
> all the versions. v2 and v3 are out of my inbox now :)

All good, I had to quickly roll v3 as v2 had wrong author information 
and I couldn't risk getting v2 applied.

Arınç

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ