netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 3/6] ice: add Tx hang devlink health reporter

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <f1ea076c-e576-417c-9ecc-abb4aa7ebff7@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:33:34 +0200
From: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <apw@...onical.com>,
	<joe@...ches.com>, <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>, <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <willemb@...gle.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Przemek Kitszel
	<przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Igor Bagnucki <igor.bagnucki@...el.com>,
	Wojciech Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-next v2 3/6] ice: add Tx hang
 devlink health reporter



On 7/22/2024 11:23 AM, Mateusz Polchlopek wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/14/2024 4:23 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 05:32:48 -0400 Mateusz Polchlopek wrote:
>>> +    err = devlink_health_report(reporter, msg, priv_ctx);
>>> +    if (err) {
>>> +        struct ice_pf *pf = devlink_health_reporter_priv(reporter);
>>> +
>>> +        dev_err(ice_pf_to_dev(pf),
>>> +            "failed to report %s via devlink health, err %d\n",
>>> +            msg, err);
>>
>> My knee-jerk reaction is - why not put it in devlink_health_report()?
>> Also, I'd rate limit the message.
> 
> Hmmm... That's good point. I will talk to the author about that but
> seems to be good point Jakub.
> 

I took a look into the code and it seems that we do not do auto
recovering, so also ignoring return value which always will be 0.

I will remove this error checking in v3 version.