netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: lan9303: ensure chip reset and wait for READY status

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: <df6715cba7b1d4c0729f9b5da44e7d34fa925d1b.camel@siemens.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 12:51:09 +0000
From: "Sverdlin, Alexander" <alexander.sverdlin@...mens.com>
To: "olteanv@...il.com" <olteanv@...il.com>, "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: "agust@...x.de" <agust@...x.de>, "Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com"
	<Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "f.fainelli@...il.com" <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: lan9303: ensure chip reset and wait
 for READY status

Hi Andrew!

On Tue, 2024-10-01 at 14:20 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > I think the subject line should have "net" tag instead of "net-next" as 
> > > > it is an update on the existing driver in the netdev source tree.
> > > > 
> > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
> > > 
> > > I explicitly didn't target it for -stable because seems that nobody
> > > else is affected by this issue (or have their downstream workarounds).
> > 
> > Explain a bit more why nobody 'else' is affected by the issue, and why
> > you're not part of the 'else' people that would justify backporting to
> > stable?
> 
> At a guess, they have a lot of stuff in the EEPROM, which other
> don't. I've seen this before with Marvell switches. But i always worry
> that the EEPROM contents are going to be break an assumption of the
> driver.

The issue is real, but I suppose most of the designs use MDIO with this switch.
And it also depends, if people implement reset GPIO or not -- the switch
starts EEPROM read right after reset -- which will conflict with driver
probe. But this will not be visible on simplified schematics.

Nevertheless, IMO this is indeed a fix, let's target it for -stable,
I'll prepare v2 thinking about read_poll_timeout().

-- 
Alexander Sverdlin
Siemens AG
www.siemens.com