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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <472A1526.8070208@intel.com> Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:04:22 -0700 From: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> CC: jeff@...zik.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davej@...hat.com, ajax@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000, e1000e valid-addr fixes David Miller wrote: > From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> > Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:20:30 -0400 > >> David Miller wrote: >>> From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> >>> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 21:03:36 -0400 >>> >>>> I'm wondering if there is a way to avoid adding >>>> >>>> if (!is_valid_ether_addr(dev->dev_addr)) >>>> return -EINVAL; >>>> >>>> to every ethernet driver's ->open() hook. >>> The first idea I get is: >>> >>> 1) Create netdev->validate_dev_addr(). >>> >>> 2) If it exists, invoke it before ->open(), abort >>> and return if any errors signaled. >>> >>> etherdev init hooks up a function that does the above >>> check, which allows us to avoid editing every ethernet >>> driver >>> >>> What do you think? >> Seems sane to me. Something like this (attached)? > > Looks great: > > Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net> I like it. Should I start sending patches to remove the checks from e1000/e1000e/ixgb/ixgbe already (to David, I assume?)? Auke - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists