netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpftool: feature probing, change default action

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:05:58 +0000
From:   Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>
To:     Prashant Bhole <bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpftool: feature probing, change default action

2019-01-24 11:51 UTC+0900 ~ Prashant Bhole <bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp>
> When 'bpftool feature' is executed it shows incorrect help string.
> 
> test# bpftool feature
> Usage: bpftool bpftool probe [COMPONENT] [macros [prefix PREFIX]]
>         bpftool bpftool help
> 
>         COMPONENT := { kernel | dev NAME }
> 
> Instead of fixing the help text by tweaking argv[] indices, this
> patch changes the default action to 'probe'. It makes the behavior
> consistent with other subcommands, where first subcommand without
> extra parameter results in 'show' action.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Prashant Bhole <bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp>
> ---
>   tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> index 993c6f1e5473..d672d9086fff 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/feature.c
> @@ -753,8 +753,8 @@ static int do_help(int argc, char **argv)
>   }
>   
>   static const struct cmd cmds[] = {
> -	{ "help",	do_help },
>   	{ "probe",	do_probe },
> +	{ "help",	do_help },
>   	{ 0 }
>   };
>   
> 

Oh, thanks! This seems to be the correct thing to do indeed.

Reviewed-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>