> -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevche...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 8:12 AM > To: Kweh, Hock Leong <hock.leong.k...@intel.com> > Cc: David S. Miller <da...@davemloft.net>; Joao Pinto > <joao.pi...@synopsys.com>; Giuseppe CAVALLARO <peppe.cavall...@st.com>; > seraphin.bonna...@st.com; Jarod Wilson <ja...@redhat.com>; Alexandre > TORGUE <alexandre.tor...@gmail.com>; Joachim Eastwood > <manab...@gmail.com>; Niklas Cassel <niklas.cas...@axis.com>; Johan Hovold > <jo...@kernel.org>; Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz>; lars.pers...@axis.com; > netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; LKML <linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] net: stmmac: fix maxmtu assignment to be within valid > range > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Kweh, Hock Leong > <hock.leong.k...@intel.com> wrote: > > From: "Kweh, Hock Leong" <hock.leong.k...@intel.com> > > > > There is no checking valid value of maxmtu when getting it from device tree. > > This resolution added the checking condition to ensure the assignment is > > made within a valid range. > > > changelog v4: > > * add print warning message when maxmtu > max_mtu as well > > Yep. > > > * add maxmtu = JUMBO_LEN into each *_default_data() at stmmac_pci.c > > Yep. > > But see comment below. > > P.S. And perhaps next time send into our internal mailing list first for > review. > > > @@ -3345,8 +3345,14 @@ int stmmac_dvr_probe(struct device *device, > > ndev->max_mtu = JUMBO_LEN; > > else > > ndev->max_mtu = SKB_MAX_HEAD(NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN); > > - if (priv->plat->maxmtu < ndev->max_mtu) > > + if ((priv->plat->maxmtu < ndev->max_mtu) && > > + (priv->plat->maxmtu >= ndev->min_mtu)) > > ndev->max_mtu = priv->plat->maxmtu; > > > + else if ((priv->plat->maxmtu < ndev->min_mtu) || > > + (priv->plat->maxmtu > ndev->max_mtu)) > > + netdev_warn(priv->dev, > > What is the difference to just 'else'? (Returning back to my initial > proposal, I don't remember telling anything about 'else if' concept) >
When priv->plat->maxmtu == ndev->max_mtu will not be a warning message. Oh NO ... it is a valid case for priv->plat->maxmtu > ndev->max_mtu if the assignment of ndev->max_mtu is using SKB_MAX_HEAD(NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN), which is < JUMBO_LEN, then priv->plat->maxmtu > ndev->max_mtu is valid. Revert back and submit V5. Thanks. > > + "%s: warning: maxmtu having invalid value > > (%d)\n", > > + __func__, priv->plat->maxmtu); > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko
