netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/5] net: ravb: Do not apply RX checksum settings to hardware if the interface is down

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: <e48e0cba-572b-93ac-efe4-112305721142@omp.ru>
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2024 23:37:31 +0300
From: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>, Claudiu.Beznea
	<claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "kuba@...nel.org"
	<kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Claudiu Beznea
	<claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/5] net: ravb: Do not apply RX checksum
 settings to hardware if the interface is down

On 2/9/24 11:41 PM, Biju Das wrote:
[...]

>>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
>>>
>>> Do not apply the RX checksum settings to hardware if the interface is
>>> down.
>>> In case runtime PM is enabled, and while the interface is down, the IP
>>> will be in reset mode (as for some platforms disabling the clocks will
>>> switch the IP to reset mode, which will lead to losing register
>>> contents) and applying settings in reset mode is not an option.
>>> Instead, cache the RX checksum settings and apply them in ravb_open()
>>> through ravb_emac_init().
>>> This has been solved by introducing pm_runtime_active() check. The
>>> device runtime PM usage counter has been incremented to avoid
>>> disabling the device clocks while the check is in progress (if any).
>>>
>>> Commit prepares for the addition of runtime PM.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
> 
> This will do the same job, without code duplication right?
> 
> static int ravb_set_features(struct net_device *ndev,
> 			     netdev_features_t features)
> {
> 	struct ravb_private *priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
> 	struct device *dev = &priv->pdev->dev;
> 	const struct ravb_hw_info *info = priv->info;
> 
> 	pm_runtime_get_noresume(dev);
> 	if (!pm_runtime_active(dev)) {
> 		pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> 		ndev->features = features;
> 		return 0;
> 	}
> 		
> 	return info->set_feature(ndev, features);

   We now leak the device reference by not calling pm_runtime_put_noidle()
after this statement...
   The approach seems sane though -- Claudiu, please consider following it.

[...]

> Cheers,
> Biju

MBR, Sergey