netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/2] lantiq

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: <20250922110717.7n743dmxrcrokf4k@skbuf>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 14:07:17 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] lantiq_gswip fixes

Hi Daniel,

On Sat, Sep 20, 2025 at 02:07:25AM +0100, Daniel Golle wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
> Hi Jakub,
> 
> sorry for the late reply.
> I got both patches in my testing tree for long time and can confirm that
> both are fixing real issues.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 04:50:08PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 10:21:40 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > This is a small set of fixes which I believe should be backported for
> > > the lantiq_gswip driver. Daniel Golle asked me to submit them here:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/aLiDfrXUbw1O5Vdi@pidgin.makrotopia.org/
> > > 
> > > As mentioned there, a merge conflict with net-next is expected, due to
> > > the movement of the driver to the 'drivers/net/dsa/lantiq' folder there.
> > > Good luck :-/
> > > 
> > > Patch 2/2 fixes an old regression and is the minimal fix for that, as
> > > discussed here:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/aJfNMLNoi1VOsPrN@pidgin.makrotopia.org/
> > > 
> > > Patch 1/2 was identified by me through static analysis, and I consider
> > > it to be a serious deficiency. It needs a test tag.
> > 
> > Daniel, can we count on your for that?
> 
> I have now built the 'net' tree with only the two patches on top, and run
> local_termination.sh for basic testing before and after. I've attached the
> results of both test runs, before and after applying both patches.
> Consider the whole series
> 
> Tested-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
> 
> I hope we can proceed with the other important fixes Vladimir has pulled
> out of his slieve[1], however, I agree that not all of them should go via
> the 'net' tree, and I suppose (speaking for all of OpenWrt, which is the
> main user when it comes to devices with Lantiq SoC containing those
> switches) that going via net-next is fine -- we can still backport
> individual commits, or even all of them, and apply them on OpenWrt's
> current Linux 6.12 kernel sources.
> 
> [1]: https://github.com/vladimiroltean/linux/commits/lantiq-gswip/

Thank you for testing.

I have two comments to make:

- I don't think your local_termination.sh exercises the bug fixed by
  patch "[1/2] net: dsa: lantiq_gswip: move gswip_add_single_port_br()
  call to port_setup()". The port has to be initially down before
  joining a bridge, and be brought up afterwards. This can be tested
  manually. In local_termination.sh, although bridge_create() runs
  "ip link set $h2 up" after "ip link set $h2 master br0", $h2 was
  already up due to "simple_if_init $h2".

- If the vast majority of users make use of this driver through OpenWrt,
  and if backporting to the required trees is done by OpenWrt and the
  fixes' presence in linux-stable is not useful, I can offer to resend
  this set plus the remaining patches all together through the net-next
  tree, and avoid complications such as merge conflicts.