netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/1] net: wwan: mhi_wwan_mbim: use correct mux

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: <CAFEp6-1nB-hiJb+W3zmnCSy9XaNfgbW7AqMeJ3LKa4+St-AqJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 22:37:59 +0200
From: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@....qualcomm.com>
To: Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com>
Cc: Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] net: wwan: mhi_wwan_mbim: use correct mux_id for multiplexing

On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 4:19 PM Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Loic,
>
> Il giorno lun 26 mag 2025 alle ore 16:06 Loic Poulain
> <loic.poulain@....qualcomm.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > Hi Daniele,
> >
> > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:19 PM Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > When creating a multiplexed netdevice for modems requiring the WDS
> > > custom mux_id value, the mux_id improperly starts from 1, while it
> > > should start from WDS_BIND_MUX_DATA_PORT_MUX_ID + 1.
> > >
> > > Fix this by moving the session_id assignment logic to mhi_mbim_newlink.
> >
> > Currently, the MBIM session ID is identical to the WWAN ID. This
> > change introduces a divergence by applying an offset to the WWAN ID
> > for certain devices.
> >
> > Whether this is acceptable likely depends on how the MBIM control path
> > handles session addressing. For example, if mbimcli refers to
> > SessionID 1, does that actually control the data session with WWAN ID
> > 113?
> >
>
> yes, quoting from a QC case we had:
>
> "There was a change in QBI on SDX75/72 to map sessionid from MBIM to
> muxids in the range (0x70-0x8F) for the PCIE tethered use.
> So, if you are bringing up data call using MBIM sessionId=1, QBI will
> bind that port to MuxId=113. So, the IP data packets are also expected
> to come from host on MuxId=113."

Ack, could you please include that information in the commit message?
Also, we should consider renaming the mux-id macro/function to make
its purpose clearer.

Regards,
Loic