netdev - RE: [PATCH v2 2/3] if_link: Add VF multicast promiscuous control

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:	Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:29:43 +0000
From:	"Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>
To:	Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
CC:	Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>,
	"vyasevic@...hat.com" <vyasevic@...hat.com>,
	"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>,
	"e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Choi, Sy Jong" <sy.jong.choi@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	Hayato Momma <h-momma@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/3] if_link: Add VF multicast promiscuous control

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Edward Cree [mailto:ecree@...arflare.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 5:53 AM
> To: Skidmore, Donald C
> Cc: Hiroshi Shimamoto; vyasevic@...hat.com; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Alexander
> Duyck; Bjørn Mork; e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org; Choi, Sy Jong; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David
> Laight; Hayato Momma
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] if_link: Add VF multicast promiscuous control
> 
> On 20/02/15 21:05, Skidmore, Donald C wrote:
> > If a vender specific interface is objectionable maybe a simpler and more
> generic interface would be for the PF to be able to set a given VF into
> "trusted" mode... I admit exactly what 'trusted' meant would vary from
> vender to vender, but it would be a way for the driver to know it could allow
> configurations such as this.  Just an idea, since we seem to be getting more
> requests for things such as this.
> That's an even worse idea; now you have a generic interface with completely
> undefined semantics.
> The right way to do this, imho, is to use one of the standard interfaces for
> driver-specific gubbins - e.g. sysfs, genetlink or even (whisper it) ioctls - and
> put your 'VF promisc mode' setting there.  That way you have a vendor-
> specific interface with vendor-specified semantics.
> Of those options, I'd recommend sysfs as the best fit.
> The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for
> the addressee(s) only. If you have received this message in error, please
> notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Unless you are an
> addressee (or authorized to receive for an addressee), you may not use,
> copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in this
> message. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this
> message is strictly prohibited.

I do see your point, but I thought custom sysfs interfaces (not to even mention new ioctl's :) were frowned upon?  Which is why I didn't even consider sysfs as an option.