netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: ethernet: mtk-star-emac: rearm interrupts in rx

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: <20250422160716.71a16b1a@fedora.home>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 16:07:16 +0200
From: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>
To: Louis-Alexis Eyraud <louisalexis.eyraud@...labora.com>
Cc: Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
 Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
 <pabeni@...hat.com>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, Biao
 Huang <biao.huang@...iatek.com>, Yinghua Pan <ot_yinghua.pan@...iatek.com>,
 kernel@...labora.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: ethernet: mtk-star-emac: rearm interrupts in
 rx_poll only when advised

Hi Louis-Alexis,

On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 15:03:39 +0200
Louis-Alexis Eyraud <louisalexis.eyraud@...labora.com> wrote:

> In mtk_star_rx_poll function, on event processing completion, the
> mtk_star_emac driver calls napi_complete_done but ignores its return
> code and enable RX DMA interrupts inconditionally. This return code
> gives the info if a device should avoid rearming its interrupts or not,
> so fix this behaviour by taking it into account.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Louis-Alexis Eyraud <louisalexis.eyraud@...labora.com>

Patch looks correct, however is it fixing a problematic behaviour
you've seen ? I'm asking because it lacks a Fixes: tag, as well as
targetting one of the net/net-next trees :)

Thanks,

Maxime