From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FF1733E9 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:06:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99D81C433C8; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:06:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1694541999; bh=gQ3h/0qltbegfr5XcLpRJB3u5Gklgxi7lzJ/OKNiokU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=h9NDNX2zDehjHEvBEt1Y/GZxfI/JJA1uFq9UbFPWmTSQcJkmfuXcvJ8De+NqP4aOA XcOWgQMeFX3ilmcNqdZQvCJ8iUAnfIkVpLaryWCs7sNj+79Qqb6NLbKOrS+5lRCb1Y 32J72P8O+X6xJvhYv/Pfo42mD11xOvzg8q9KpkKwDjETDq2LdC491s4qTiCeaDDxOK sEBGv0ABBTHpJkRnhwtP78b14uxt2NWbar0FbCiD3aNcAecC8kCTMfjZwjvJGnNgRm +u6sk1EPdsdmw0lC22/hClC9GIpS77mj5w+tDvfgrFdIIitl9Tu3WVFbo0W7D+V5J2 W0aEA4QzCTg5w== Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 20:06:35 +0200 From: Simon Horman To: Lorenzo Bianconi Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com, nbd@nbd.name, john@phrozen.org, sean.wang@mediatek.com, Mark-MC.Lee@mediatek.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ethernet: mtk_wed: do not assume offload callbacks are always set Message-ID: <20230912180635.GM401982@kernel.org> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 10:26:07AM +0200, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > Check if wlan.offload_enable and wlan.offload_disable callbacks are set > in mtk_wed_flow_add/mtk_wed_flow_remove since mt7996 will not rely > on them. > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi Hi Lorenzo, It's not not a big deal from my perspective, but I do wonder if these mediatek patches could have been a series. > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c > index 94376aa2b34c..d8cd59f44401 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mediatek/mtk_wed.c > @@ -1718,6 +1718,9 @@ int mtk_wed_flow_add(int index) > if (!hw || !hw->wed_dev) > return -ENODEV; > > + if (!hw->wed_dev->wlan.offload_enable) > + return 0; A little further down in this function it is assumed that hw->wed_dev may be NULL, a check made under a lock no less. But it is dereferenced unconditionally here without a lock. This doesn't seem right one way or another. As flagged by Smatch. > + > if (hw->num_flows) { > hw->num_flows++; > return 0; > @@ -1747,6 +1750,9 @@ void mtk_wed_flow_remove(int index) > if (!hw) > return; > > + if (!hw->wed_dev->wlan.offload_disable) > + return; > + > if (--hw->num_flows) > return; > > -- > 2.41.0 > >