netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement receive path to receive rx ethernet frames

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: <8274f036-87a0-46de-8746-63b39cb6a6ec@microchip.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 06:13:10 +0000
From: <Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>
To: <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, <horms@...nel.org>, <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <corbet@....net>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com>,
	<ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
	<vladimir.oltean@....com>, <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
	<Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com>, <Pier.Beruto@...emi.com>,
	<Selvamani.Rajagopal@...emi.com>, <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>,
	<benjamin.bigler@...nformulastudent.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement
 receive path to receive rx ethernet frames

Hi Andrew,

On 26/04/24 11:43 pm, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 01:45:20PM +0000, Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> On 24/04/24 5:38 am, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>>> +static int oa_tc6_allocate_rx_skb(struct oa_tc6 *tc6)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     tc6->rx_skb = netdev_alloc_skb(tc6->netdev, tc6->netdev->mtu + ETH_HLEN +
>>>> +                                    ETH_FCS_LEN + NET_IP_ALIGN);
>>>> +     if (!tc6->rx_skb) {
>>>> +             tc6->netdev->stats.rx_dropped++;
>>>> +             return -ENOMEM;
>>>> +     }
>>>> +     skb_reserve(tc6->rx_skb, NET_IP_ALIGN);
>>>
>>> I think you can use netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align() here.
>> Ah OK, then do you mean we can rewrite the function
>> oa_tc6_allocate_rx_skb() as below?
>>
>> static int oa_tc6_allocate_rx_skb(struct oa_tc6 *tc6)
>> {
>>        tc6->rx_skb = netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align(tc6->netdev, tc6->netdev->mtu +
>> ETH_HLEN + ETH_FCS_LEN);
>>        if (tc6->rx_skb)
>>                return 0;
>>
>>        tc6->netdev->stats.rx_dropped++;
>>        return -ENOMEM;
>> }
> 
> Looks about right. But i did say 'I think', meaning i'm not too sure
> about this.
> 
> I generally don't review code actually moving packets around. It is
> what developers focus on, test heavily, and so is generally O.K. It is
> the code around the edges which often needs improvements prompted by
> review, ethtool, PHY handling, statistics.
You are right. But I tested implementing your proposal with iperf3 and 
it works as expected. So will keep this implementation in the next version.

Best regards,
Parthiban V
> 
>          Andrew