netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] bnxt_en: add support for rx-copybreak ethtool command

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: <CAMArcTUgDLawxxvFKsfavJiBs0yrEBD3rZOUcicYOAWYr+XYyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 15:29:54 +0900
From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, almasrymina@...gle.com, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, donald.hunter@...il.com, 
	corbet@....net, kory.maincent@...tlin.com, maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, 
	danieller@...dia.com, hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com, ecree.xilinx@...il.com, 
	przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com, hkallweit1@...il.com, ahmed.zaki@...el.com, 
	paul.greenwalt@...el.com, rrameshbabu@...dia.com, idosch@...dia.com, 
	asml.silence@...il.com, kaiyuanz@...gle.com, willemb@...gle.com, 
	aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, dw@...idwei.uk, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, 
	bcreeley@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/7] bnxt_en: add support for rx-copybreak
 ethtool command

On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 1:41 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>

Hi Andew,
Thanks a lot for the review!

> > > I agree that we need to support disabling rx-copybreak.
> > > What about 0 ~ 64 means to disable rx-copybreak?
> > > Or should only 0 be allowed to disable rx-copybreak?
> > >
> >
> > I think a single value of 0 that means disable RX copybreak is more
> > clear and intuitive.  Also, I think we can allow 64 to be a valid
> > value.
> >
> > So, 0 means to disable.  1 to 63 are -EINVAL and 64 to 1024 are valid.  Thanks.
>
> Please spend a little time and see what other drivers do. Ideally we
> want one consistent behaviour for all drivers that allow copybreak to
> be disabled.

There is no specific disable value in other drivers.
But some other drivers have min/max rx-copybreak value.
If rx-copybreak is low enough, it will not be worked.
So, min value has been working as a disable value actually.

I think Andrew's point makes sense.
So I would like to change min value from 65 to 64, not add a disable value.

Thanks a lot!
Taehee Yoo

>
>         Andrew