linux-kernel - Re: [pci PATCH v5 3/4] ena: Migrate over to unmanaged SR-IOV support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 13 Mar 2018 09:14:16 +0000
From:   David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, dan.daly@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        keith.busch@...el.com, netanel@...zon.com, mheyne@...zon.de,
        liang-min.wang@...el.com, mark.d.rustad@...el.com
Subject: Re: [pci PATCH v5 3/4] ena: Migrate over to unmanaged SR-IOV
 support



On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 09:54 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 08:45:19AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Because binding to pci-stub means that you'd now enable the simple
> SR-IOV for any device bound to PCI stub.  Which often might be the wrong
> thing.

No, *using* it would be the wrong thing (bad root; no biscuit).

Except when the PF doesn't have SR-IOV capability anyway, in which case
who cares.

Or when the PF does have SR-IOV capability and root has ensure that
she's doing the right thing.

I understand the arguments about disallowing root from doing bad
things. Not that I agree with them. But simply changing to a
*different* driver seems pointless.


Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5213 bytes)