On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 08:38:34PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > +static int pse_set_pse_config(struct net_device *dev,
> > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack,
> > + struct nlattr **tb)
> > +{
> > + struct phy_device *phydev = dev->phydev;
> > + struct pse_control_config config = {};
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (!tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL])
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> I would make use of extack here, and report what is missing.
>
> > +
> > + config.admin_cotrol = nla_get_u8(tb[ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL]);
>
> It would be good to have some basic validation here, make sure user
> space has passed a reasonable value.
this values are already validate by the ethnl_pse_set_policy
> You should also define what 0 and
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL_UNKNOWN means here when passed in. In
> future, there could be additional things which could be configured, so
> struct pse_control_config gets additional members.
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL appears to be mandatory, you return
> -EVINAL if missing, so if you don't want to change it, but change some
> other new thing, maybe 0 should be passed here? And the driver should
> not consider it an error?
ack. changed to 0 and added comment.
> ETHTOOL_A_PODL_PSE_ADMIN_CONTROL_UNKNOWN
> however seems invalid and so should be rejected here?
yes. it is already rejected. I added comment to make it more visible
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
