netdev - Re: [net PATCH] net: phy: correctly check soft

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: <ca2dc1d5-ff3c-49c9-8b83-28d17c2e9138@lunn.ch>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:23:17 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net PATCH] net: phy: correctly check soft_reset ret ONLY if
 defined for PHY

On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 06:55:47PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 05:24:00PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 04:12:58PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > soft_reset call for phy_init_hw had multiple revision across the years
> > > and the implementation goes back to 2014. Originally was a simple call
> > > to write the generic PHY reset BIT, it was then moved to a dedicated
> > > function. It was then added the option for PHY driver to define their
> > > own special way to reset the PHY. Till this change, checking for ret was
> > > correct as it was always filled by either the generic reset or the
> > > custom implementation. This changed tho with commit 6e2d85ec0559 ("net:
> > > phy: Stop with excessive soft reset"), as the generic reset call to PHY
> > > was dropped but the ret check was never made entirely optional and
> > > dependent whether soft_reset was defined for the PHY driver or not.
> > > 
> > > Luckly nothing was ever added before the soft_reset call so the ret
> > > check (in the case where a PHY didn't had soft_reset defined) although
> > > wrong, never caused problems as ret was init 0 at the start of
> > > phy_init_hw.
> > > 
> > > To prevent any kind of problem and to make the function cleaner and more
> > > robust, correctly move the ret check if the soft_reset section making it
> > > optional and needed only with the function defined.
> > 
> > I think this should target net-next, not net. It does not appear to be
> > an problem which actually affects somebody using stable kernels.
> > 
> > The change itself looks O.K.
> >
> 
> Ok to resubmit or should I wait 24h? (asking as it's a very simple
> change)

Please wait 24 hours.

> Also is the stable Cc ok?
> (that was the main reason I added the net tag to this)

No drop the Cc: Stable. Your description of the problem does not fit
the rules for stable.

    Andrew