Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: mac-auth/MAB implementation

From: Ido Schimmel <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:58:30 +0200

On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 09:37:48PM +0100, Hans J. Schultz wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
> index 8a874b6fc8e1..0a57f4e7dd46 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/global1_atu.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>  
>  #include "chip.h"
>  #include "global1.h"
> +#include "switchdev.h"
>  
>  /* Offset 0x01: ATU FID Register */
>  
> @@ -426,6 +427,8 @@ static irqreturn_t mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  	if (err)
>  		goto out;
>  
> +	mv88e6xxx_reg_unlock(chip);

Why? At minimum such a change needs to be explained in the commit
message and probably split to a separate preparatory patch, assuming the
change is actually required.

> +
>  	spid = entry.state;
>  
>  	if (val & MV88E6XXX_G1_ATU_OP_AGE_OUT_VIOLATION) {
> @@ -446,6 +449,12 @@ static irqreturn_t mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  				    "ATU miss violation for %pM portvec %x spid %d\n",
>  				    entry.mac, entry.portvec, spid);
>  		chip->ports[spid].atu_miss_violation++;
> +
> +		if (fid && chip->ports[spid].mab)
> +			err = mv88e6xxx_handle_violation(chip, spid, &entry,
> +							 fid, MV88E6XXX_G1_ATU_OP_MISS_VIOLATION);
> +		if (err)
> +			goto out;

On error the kernel will try to unlock a mutex that is already unlocked.

>  	}
>  
>  	if (val & MV88E6XXX_G1_ATU_OP_FULL_VIOLATION) {
> @@ -454,7 +463,6 @@ static irqreturn_t mv88e6xxx_g1_atu_prob_irq_thread_fn(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  				    entry.mac, entry.portvec, spid);
>  		chip->ports[spid].atu_full_violation++;
>  	}
> -	mv88e6xxx_reg_unlock(chip);
>  
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;