From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] ravb/sh_eth: fix sleep in atomic by reusing shared ethtool handlers Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 22:13:29 +0300 Message-ID: <0033a44c-d137-b5f8-2259-33ac11c70d68@cogentembedded.com> References: <20180704081245.7395-1-vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com> <20180705.095631.647119741817887082.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: andrew@lunn.ch, geert@linux-m68k.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Vladimir Zapolskiy , David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:54900 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753844AbeGETNe (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2018 15:13:34 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id i139-v6so12613804wmf.4 for ; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 12:13:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-MW Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/05/2018 08:59 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote: >>> For ages trivial changes to RAVB and SuperH ethernet links by means of >>> standard 'ethtool' trigger a 'sleeping function called from invalid >>> context' bug, to visualize it on r8a7795 ULCB: >> ... >>> The root cause is that an attempt to modify ECMR and GECMR registers >>> only when RX/TX function is disabled was too overcomplicated in its >>> original implementation, also processing of an optional Link Change >>> interrupt added even more complexity, as a result the implementation >>> was error prone. >>> >>> The new locking scheme is confirmed to be correct by dumping driver >>> specific and generic PHY framework function calls with aid of ftrace >>> while running more or less advanced tests. >>> >>> Please note that sh_eth patches from the series were built-tested only. >>> >>> On purpose I do not add Fixes tags, the reused PHY handlers were added >>> way later than the fixed problems were firstly found in the drivers. >>> >>> Changes from v1 to v2: >>> * the original patches are split to bugfixes and enhancements only, >>> both v1 and v2 series are absolutely equal in total, thus I omit >>> description of changes in individual patches, >>> * the latter implies that there should be no strict need for retesting, >>> but because formally two series are different, I have to drop the tags >>> given by Geert and Andrew, please send your tags again. >> >> These changes look fine to me but I want to see some reviews and/or >> testing before I apply them. >> > > Thanks to Geert for finding time to test v1 series, the sums of changes > are word for word, https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-renesas-soc/msg28666.html I might find a time to test the sh_eth patches on the R-Car V3H Starter Kit board; I'm still on vacations, so don't have access to the R-Car gen2 boards at home... > Andrew also gave a number of Reviewed-by tags, but they are not directly > applicable to new patches, unfortunately. > > In any case let's wait for scrupulous review completed by Sergei, I believe > he'd like to contribute to the review process, and Sergei may highlight more > shortcomings. Heh. I'm surprised DaveM haven't lectured you about not mixing fixes and cleanups in the single series -- they go to his different 2 trees, net.git and net-next.git... If you need your cleanups based on your fixes, you have to indicate that in the cleanups patchset... > -- > Best wishes, > Vladimir MBR, Sergei