netdev - Re: [patch net-next] devlink: remove reload failed checks in params get/set callbacks

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: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 12:21:03 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 moshe@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next] devlink: remove reload failed checks in params
 get/set callbacks

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023 17:20:40 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Back then, it was a possible fix. Alternative way to fix this was to
> >> make sure drivers register/unregister params in the code where it is
> >> ensured that the data accessed by params callbacks are available.
> >> But that was problematic as the list of params wes static durint  
> >
> >s/wes/was/
> >s/durint/during/  
> 
> Maintainers, I will send v2 with these typos fixed tomorrow, if these
> are not any other comments.

Feel free to toss in

pw-bot: changes-requested

so we don't have to update the status manually.

The commit message would benefit from a rewrite, TBH I don't understand
half of it, specially:

  Alternative way to fix this was to make sure drivers
  register/unregister params in the code where it is ensured that 
  the data accessed by params callbacks are available.

Can't parse.

  list of params [was] static [during] devlink instance being
  registered.

You mean that list of params can't change after the instance was
registered?

  register/unregister params alongside with the data it touches

Meaning params for a sub-object are registered when the sub-object 
is registered? An example could help clarify the meaning.

> >> devlink instance being registered.
> >> 
> >> Eventually this limitation was lifted and also the alternative fix
> >> (which also fixed another issue) was done for mlxsw by
> >> commit 74cbc3c03c82 ("mlxsw: spectrum_acl_tcam: Move devlink param to TCAM code").
> >> 
> >> The checks are no longer relevant, each driver should make sure to
> >> register/unregister params alongside with the data it touches. Remove
> >> the checks.