Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 21 May 2020 21:23:42 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
To:     netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>,
        Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>,
        intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
        "Neftin, Sasha" <sasha.neftin@intel.com>,
        "Lifshits, Vitaly" <vitaly.lifshits@intel.com>,
        Stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] e1000e: Make WOL info in ethtool consistent with
 device wake up ability
Message-ID: <20200521192342.GE8771@lion.mk-sys.cz>
References: <cover.1590081982.git.yu.c.chen@intel.com>
 <725bad2f3ce7f7b7f1667d53b6527dc059f9e419.1590081982.git.yu.c.chen@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <725bad2f3ce7f7b7f1667d53b6527dc059f9e419.1590081982.git.yu.c.chen@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 01:59:13AM +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> Currently the ethtool shows that WOL(Wake On Lan) is enabled
> even if the device wakeup ability has been disabled via sysfs:
>   cat /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1f.6/power/wakeup
>    disabled
> 
>   ethtool eno1
>   ...
>   Wake-on: g
> 
> Fix this in ethtool to check if the user has explicitly disabled the
> wake up ability for this device.

Wouldn't this lead to rather unexpected and inconsistent behaviour when
the wakeup is disabled? As you don't touch the set_wol handler, I assume
it will still allow setting enabled modes as usual so that you get e.g.

  ethtool -s eth0 wol g   # no error or warning, returns 0
  ethtool eth0            # reports no modes enabled

The first command would set the enabled wol modes but that would be
hidden from user and even the netlink notification would claim something
different. Another exampe (with kernel and ethtool >= 5.6):

  ethtool -s eth0 wol g
  ethtool -s eth0 wol +m

resulting in "mg" if device wakeup is enabled but "m" when it's disabled
(but the latter would be hidden from user and only revealed when you
enable the device wakeup).

This is a general problem discussed recently for EEE and pause
autonegotiation: if setting A can be effectively used only when B is
enabled, should we hide actual setting of A from userspace when B is
disabled or even reset the value of A whenever B gets toggled or rather
allow setting A and B independently? AFAICS the consensus seemed to be
that A should be allowed to be set and queried independently of the
value of B.

Michal

> Fixes: 6ff68026f475 ("e1000e: Use device_set_wakeup_enable")
> Reported-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: <Stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c
> index 1d47e2503072..0cccd823ff24 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ethtool.c
> @@ -1891,7 +1891,7 @@ static void e1000_get_wol(struct net_device *netdev,
>  	wol->wolopts = 0;
>  
>  	if (!(adapter->flags & FLAG_HAS_WOL) ||
> -	    !device_can_wakeup(&adapter->pdev->dev))
> +	    !device_may_wakeup(&adapter->pdev->dev))
>  		return;
>  
>  	wol->supported = WAKE_UCAST | WAKE_MCAST |
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>