linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: ethernet: validate pause autoneg setting

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:   Wed, 13 May 2020 16:59:34 +0200
From:   Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] net: ethernet: validate pause autoneg
 setting

On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 03:49:25PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > So, I think consistency of implementation is more important than fixing
> > this; the current behaviour has been established for many years now.
> 
> With netlink ethtool we have the possibility of adding a new API to
> control this. And we can leave the IOCTL API alone, and the current
> ethtool commands. We can add a new command to ethtool which uses the new API.
> 
> Question is, do we want to do this? Would we be introducing yet more
> confusion, rather than making the situation better?

For the record, netlink interface for pause parameters which is based on
existing ioctl and ethtool_ops is in mainline but not in v5.6. If there
is a consensus that it should be rethought, it might still be possible
to drop these two request types and come with a better API later (i.e.
in 5.8 or 5.9 cycle).

Michal