netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] r8169: Don't claim WoL works if LanWake flag is not set

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:	Fri, 11 Dec 2015 01:06:27 +0100
From:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To:	Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	Chun-Hao Lin <hau@...ltek.com>,
	Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] r8169: Don't claim WoL works if LanWake flag is not
 set

Corinna Vinschen <vinschen@...hat.com> :
[...]
> It's still a bit weird.  On the machines I tested this on, if I disable
> LanWake and shutdown the machine, I can send, e.g., MagicPackets as much
> as I like, the machined don't come up.  Isn't it a bit misleading then
> if ethtool reports that some WoL method is enabled but it doesn't work?

Of course it is. :o(

I'm fine with Config5.LanWake changes if you have empirical evidences that
it helps.

We have terse - outdated ? - documentation and some hint from
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=137654699802446. I'm unable to figure
what an/the adequate change could be, especially a low level chance of
regression one.

-- 
Ueimor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html