On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 08:38:34PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:

quoted

+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.

quoted

+
+	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 |