Re: [PATCH] net: phy: phy_remove_link_mode should not advertise new modes

From: Helmut Grohne <helmut.grohne@intenta.de>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: "andrew@lunn.ch" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	"f.fainelli@gmail.com" <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"hkallweit1@gmail.com" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	"linux@armlinux.org.uk" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"woojung.huh@microchip.com" <woojung.huh@microchip.com>,
	"UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
	"vivien.didelot@gmail.com" <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: phy_remove_link_mode should not advertise new modes
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:03:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200715070345.GA3452@laureti-dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200714.140710.213288407914809619.davem@davemloft.net>

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:07:10PM +0200, David Miller wrote:
> From: Helmut Grohne <helmut.grohne@intenta.de>
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:25:42 +0200
> 
> > When doing "ip link set dev ... up" for a ksz9477 backed link,
> > ksz9477_phy_setup is called and it calls phy_remove_link_mode to remove
> > 1000baseT HDX. During phy_remove_link_mode, phy_advertise_supported is
> > called.
> > 
> > If one wants to advertise fewer modes than the supported ones, one
> > usually reduces the advertised link modes before upping the link (e.g.
> > by passing an appropriate .link file to udev).  However upping
> > overrwrites the advertised link modes due to the call to
> > phy_advertise_supported reverting to the supported link modes.
> > 
> > It seems unintentional to have phy_remove_link_mode enable advertising
> > bits and it does not match its description in any way. Instead of
> > calling phy_advertise_supported, we should simply clear the link mode to
> > be removed from both supported and advertising.
> 
> The problem is that we can't allow the advertised setting to exceed
> what is in the supported list.
> 
> That's why this helper is coded this way from day one.

Would you mind going into a little more detail here?

I think you have essentially two possible cases with respect to that
assertion.

Case A: advertised does not exceed supported before the call to
        phy_remove_link_mode.

    In this case, the relevant link mode is removed from both supported
    and advertised after my patch and therefore the requested invariant
    is still ok.

Case B: advertised exceeds supported prior to the call to
        phy_remove_link_mode.

    You said that we cannot allow this to happen. So it would seem to be
    a bug somewhere else. Do you see phy_remove_link_mode as a tool to
    fix up a violated invariant?

It also is not true that the current code ensures your assertion.
Specifically, phy_advertise_supported copies the pause bits from the old
advertised to the new one regardless of whether they're set in
supported. I believe this is expected, but it means that your invariant
needs to be:

    We cannot allow advertised to exceed the supported list for
    non-pause bits.

In any case, having a helper called "phy_remove_link_mode" enable bits
in the advertised bit field is fairly unexpected. Do you disagree with
this being a bug?

Helmut