netdev - Re: [PATCH] igb: disable virtualization features on 82580

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZPCFPBOPchpKUEyl@calimero.vinschen.de>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:19:08 +0200
From: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] igb: disable virtualization features on 82580

Hi Paolo,

On Aug 31 13:41, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-08-31 at 10:09 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Disable virtualization features on 82580 just as on i210/i211.
> > This avoids that virt functions are acidentally called on 82850.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@...hat.com>
> 
> This looks like a fix to me?!? if so a suitable 'Fixes' tag should be
> included.

I tried, but failed to come up with one.  When 82580 was introduced, the
conditional in question didn't exist at all and the igb_probe_vfs
function looked pretty different.  When i210 was introduced, the
conditional was created the first time.  So I was a bit puzzled if this
fixes the patch introducing 82580, or if it fixes the introduction of
the conditional, or if it's just kind of "new functionality".

Your mail got me thinking again, and I'm going to send a v2, blaming the
patch introducing 52580. It failed to guard igb_probe_vfs correctly.
When i210 was introduced, a matching conditional should have already
existed.

Thanks,
Corinna