netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: phy: fix phy_uses_state

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: <20250901142533.p6wplnjnsnfz2xrn@skbuf>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 17:25:33 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: phy: fix phy_uses_state_machine()

On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 03:14:49PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 01:36:24PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > The new explanation and the placement of the function pointer clearing
> > make sense, thanks. Maybe add one last sentence at the end: "This covers
> > both the phylink_bringup_phy() error path, as well as the normal
> > phylink_disconnect_phy() path."
> 
> Is it really necessary to add that level of detail? phy_attach() sets
> phydev->phy_link_change, so it's natural that phy_detach() should undo
> that action, especially as phy_detach() is phy_attach()'s complement.

Well, it shows for future reference the code paths you've considered
when establishing the placement of the code. Your call whether you want
to include this sentence or not - and it looks like you don't want to.