netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 06/16] net: pcs: xpcs: Avoid creating dummy XPCS MDIO device

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: <ZW8pxM3RvyHJTwqH@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 13:46:44 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
	Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
	Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>,
	Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
	Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 06/16] net: pcs: xpcs: Avoid creating dummy XPCS
 MDIO device

On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 01:35:27PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> If the DW XPCS MDIO devices are either left unmasked for being auto-probed
> or explicitly registered in the MDIO subsystem by means of the
> mdiobus_register_board_info() method there is no point in creating the
> dummy MDIO device instance in order to get the DW XPCS handler since the
> MDIO core subsystem will create the device during the MDIO bus
> registration procedure. All what needs to be done is to just reuse the
> MDIO-device instance available in the mii_bus.mdio_map array (using some
> getter for it would look better though). It shall prevent the XPCS devices
> been accessed over several MDIO-device instances.
> 
> Note since the MDIO-device instance might be retrieved from the MDIO-bus
> map array its reference counter shall be increased. If the MDIO-device
> instance is created in the xpcs_create_mdiodev() method its reference
> counter will be already increased. So there is no point in toggling the
> reference counter in the xpcs_create() function. Just drop it from there.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c
> index 2850122f354a..a53376472394 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c
> @@ -1376,7 +1376,6 @@ static struct dw_xpcs *xpcs_create(struct mdio_device *mdiodev,
>  	if (!xpcs)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>  
> -	mdio_device_get(mdiodev);
>  	xpcs->mdiodev = mdiodev;
>  
>  	xpcs_id = xpcs_get_id(xpcs);
> @@ -1417,7 +1416,6 @@ static struct dw_xpcs *xpcs_create(struct mdio_device *mdiodev,
>  	ret = -ENODEV;
>  
>  out:
> -	mdio_device_put(mdiodev);
>  	kfree(xpcs);
>  
>  	return ERR_PTR(ret);

The above two hunks are a completely Unnecessary change.

> @@ -1437,19 +1435,21 @@ struct dw_xpcs *xpcs_create_mdiodev(struct mii_bus *bus, int addr,
>  	struct mdio_device *mdiodev;
>  	struct dw_xpcs *xpcs;
>  
> -	mdiodev = mdio_device_create(bus, addr);
> -	if (IS_ERR(mdiodev))
> -		return ERR_CAST(mdiodev);
> +	if (addr >= PHY_MAX_ADDR)
> +		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>  
> -	xpcs = xpcs_create(mdiodev, interface);
> +	if (mdiobus_is_registered_device(bus, addr)) {
> +		mdiodev = bus->mdio_map[addr];
> +		mdio_device_get(mdiodev);

This is fine - taking a reference on the mdiodev you've got from
somewhere else is the right thing to do.

> +	} else {
> +		mdiodev = mdio_device_create(bus, addr);
> +		if (IS_ERR(mdiodev))
> +			return ERR_CAST(mdiodev);
> +	}
>  
> -	/* xpcs_create() has taken a refcount on the mdiodev if it was
> -	 * successful. If xpcs_create() fails, this will free the mdio
> -	 * device here. In any case, we don't need to hold our reference
> -	 * anymore, and putting it here will allow mdio_device_put() in
> -	 * xpcs_destroy() to automatically free the mdio device.
> -	 */
> -	mdio_device_put(mdiodev);
> +	xpcs = xpcs_create(mdiodev, interface);
> +	if (IS_ERR(xpcs))
> +		mdio_device_put(mdiodev);

Without the change to xpcs_create() you don't need this change - and
this is why I say you don't understand refcounting.

The point here is that the refcounting management is in each function
where references are gained or lost.

xpcs_create() creates a new reference to the mdiodev by storing it in
the dw_xpcs structure. Therefore, it takes a reference to the mdiodev.
If something fails, it drops that reference to restore the refcount
as it was on function entry.

xpcs_create_mdiodev() as it originally stood creates the mdiodev from
the bus/address, and then passes that to xpcs_create(). Once
xpcs_create() has finished its work (irrespective of whether it was
successful or not) we're done with the mdiodev in this function, so
the reference is _always_ put.

For your use case, it would be:

	mdiodev = bus->mdio_map[addr];
	mdio_device_get(mdiodev);

	xpcs = xpcs_create(mdiodev, interface);

	mdio_device_put(mdiodev);

	return xpcs;

which illustrates this point - we get a reference to the mdiodev by
reading it from the array. We do something (calling xpcs_create)
with it. If that something was successful, it takes its own refcount
otherwise leaves it as-is. We're then done with the mdiodev so we
drop the refcount we took.

There is no need to make the code more complicated by changing this,
so I regard the refcount changes in this patch to be wrong.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!