netdev - Re: [PATCH v4] bnx2x: Fix error recovering in switch configuration

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: <20230807142459.5950f237@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 14:24:59 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Thinh Tran <thinhtr@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: aelior@...vell.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 manishc@...vell.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
 skalluru@...vell.com, drc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, abdhalee@...ibm.com,
 simon.horman@...igine.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] bnx2x: Fix error recovering in switch configuration

On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 16:08:50 -0500 Thinh Tran wrote:
> > Could you split the change into two patches - one factoring out the
> > code into bnx2x_stop_nic() and the other adding the nic_stopped
> > variable? First one should be pure code refactoring with no functional
> > changes. That'd make the reviewing process easier.  
> 
> Sorry, I misunderstood comments in the reviewing of v3 asking to factor 
> the code.
> Should I keep the changes I made, or should I summit a new patch with 
> factored code?

I am not sure what you're asking.

In v5 I'm hoping to see 3 patches (as a single series!)
patch 1 - factor out the disabling into a helper
patch 2 - introduce the bp->nic_stopped checking
patch 3 - changes to bnx2x_tx_timeout()