netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 4/4] netvsc: refactor notifier/event handling code to use the bypass framework

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, 10 Apr 2018 16:59:36 -0700
From:   Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:     Siwei Liu <loseweigh@...il.com>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org,
        "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v6 4/4] netvsc: refactor notifier/event
 handling code to use the bypass framework

On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:44:47 -0700
Siwei Liu <loseweigh@...il.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 02:26:08PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:  
> >> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:59:50 -0700
> >> Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com> wrote:
> >>  
> >> > Use the registration/notification framework supported by the generic
> >> > bypass infrastructure.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>
> >> > ---  
> >>
> >> Thanks for doing this.  Your current version has couple show stopper
> >> issues.
> >>
> >> First, the slave device is instantly taking over the slave.
> >> This doesn't allow udev/systemd to do its device rename of the slave
> >> device. Netvsc uses a delayed work to workaround this.  
> >
> > Interesting. Does this mean udev must act within a specific time window
> > then?  
> 
> Sighs, lots of hacks. Why propgating this from driver to a common
> module. We really need a clean solution.
> 

I had a patch to wait for udev to do the rename and go from there
but davem rejected it.