netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/10] bnxt_en: Extend queue stop/start for TX rings

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: <CACKFLimn1pKDJH3QSi+X5adhnHy_yLV=LJ9fz6_9YB_G64xf-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 14:59:42 -0800
From: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, pavan.chebbi@...adcom.com, 
	andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com, michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com, 
	helgaas@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org, 
	Somnath Kotur <somnath.kotur@...adcom.com>, Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@...adcom.com>, 
	David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/10] bnxt_en: Extend queue stop/start for TX rings

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 6:43 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 18:31:21 -0800 Michael Chan wrote:
> > The ring has been previously reserved with FW, so it normally should
> > not fail.  I'll need to ask the FW team for some possible failure
> > scenarios.
>
> Thanks, expectation is that start never fails.
> If the FW team comes back with "should never happen if rings
> are reserved" please add a comment to that effect here. Since
> this is one of very few implementations people may read it
> and incorrectly assume that allocating is okay.
> If the FW team comes back with a list of possible but unlikely
> scenarios I'm afraid a rework will be needed.
>

The FW team has confirmed that it should never fail in this case.  The
ring has been previously reserved and allocated.  Re-allocating it
with essentially the same parameters should never fail.  I will be
sending V5 soon.  Thanks.

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (4209 bytes)