netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix trapping frames with multiple CPU ports on MT7530

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: <dd0d716e-8fdc-b6dc-3870-e7e524e8bf49@arinc9.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 00:04:10 +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 23:59, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:35:08PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>> On 13.06.2023 23:18, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:58:33PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>>> On 13.06.2023 20:39, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Ok. Well, you don't get bonus points for fixing a problem in 2 different
>>> ways, once is enough :)
>>
>> This is not the case here though.
>>
>> This patch fixes an issue that can be stumbled upon in two ways. This is for
>> when multiple CPU ports are defined on the devicetree.
>>
>> As I explained to Russell, the first is the CPU_PORT field not matching the
>> active CPU port.
>>
>> The second is when port 5 becomes the only active CPU port. This can only
>> happen with the changing the DSA conduit support.
>>
>> The "prefer port 6" patch only prevents the first way from happening. The
>> latter still can happen. But this feature doesn't exist yet. Hence why I
>> think we should apply this series as-is (after some patch log changes) and
>> backport it without this patch on kernels older than 5.18.
>>
>> Arınç
> 
> I was following you until the last phrase. Why should we apply this series
> as-is [ to net.git ], if this patch fixes a problem (the *only* problem in
> lack of .port_change_master() support, aka for stable kernels) that is
> already masked by a different patch targeted to net.git?

Because I don't see the latter patch as a fix. It treats the symptom, 
not the cause.

Anyway, I'm fine with taking this patch from this series and put it on 
my series for net-next instead.

Arınç