From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] nfp: don't depend on eth_tbl being available
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:38:50 -0700
Message-ID: <20180427103850.6f580a14@cakuba.netronome.com>
References: <20180425182108.31363-1-jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
        <20180427.111556.1931814913979522341.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, oss-drivers@netronome.com
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qk0-f193.google.com ([209.85.220.193]:37275 "EHLO
        mail-qk0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1757425AbeD0Riy (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:38:54 -0400
Received: by mail-qk0-f193.google.com with SMTP id d74so2016834qkg.4
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 10:38:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180427.111556.1931814913979522341.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 11:15:56 -0400 (EDT), David Miller wrote:
> From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:21:08 -0700
> 
> > For very very old generation of the management FW Ethernet port
> > information table may theoretically not be available.  This in
> > turn will cause the nfp_port structures to not be allocated.
> > 
> > Make sure we don't crash the kernel when there is no eth_tbl:
> > 
> > RIP: 0010:nfp_net_pci_probe+0xf2/0xb40 [nfp]
> > ...
> > Call Trace:
> >   nfp_pci_probe+0x6de/0xab0 [nfp]
> >   local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0
> >   work_for_cpu_fn+0x1a/0x30
> >   process_one_work+0x1de/0x3e0
> > 
> > Found while working with broken/development version of management FW.
> > 
> > Fixes: a5950182c00e ("nfp: map mac_stats and vf_cfg BARs")
> > Fixes: 93da7d9660ee ("nfp: provide nfp_port to of nfp_net_get_mac_addr()")
> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dirk van der Merwe <dirk.vandermerwe@netronome.com>  
> 
> Applied, thanks Jakub.

Thank you!

> Do you want this queued up for -stable?  It seems borderline, at best, to me.

Yes, I think we don't need stable for now.  This should never happen
(tm) in production and there has been some churn around this code.  I
don't think it's worth a backport.