Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] lan966x: Fix crash when adding interface under a lag

From: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:52:20 -0800

On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 13:30:54 +0100 Horatiu Vultur wrote:
>  	for (lag = 0; lag < lan966x->num_phys_ports; ++lag) {
> -		struct net_device *bond = lan966x->ports[lag]->bond;
> +		struct lan966x_port *port = lan966x->ports[lag];
>  		int num_active_ports = 0;
> +		struct net_device *bond;
>  		unsigned long bond_mask;
>  		u8 aggr_idx[16];
>  
> -		if (!bond || (visited & BIT(lag)))
> +		if (!port || !port->bond || (visited & BIT(lag)))
>  			continue;
>  
> +		bond = port->bond;
>  		bond_mask = lan966x_lag_get_mask(lan966x, bond);
>  
>  		for_each_set_bit(p, &bond_mask, lan966x->num_phys_ports) {
>  			struct lan966x_port *port = lan966x->ports[p];
>  
> +			if (!port)
> +				continue;

Why would lan966x_lag_get_mask() set a bit for a port that doesn't
exist? Earlier check makes sense. This one seems too defensive.
-- 
pw-bot: cr