linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 0/2] net: hns3: adds two VLAN feature

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]

Message-ID: <cb427604-05ee-504c-03d0-fcce16b3cfcc@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 May 2020 17:35:06 +0800
From:   tanhuazhong <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <salil.mehta@...wei.com>, <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 0/2] net: hns3: adds two VLAN feature



On 2020/5/22 5:37, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:17:07 -0700
> 
>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 19:38:23 +0800 Huazhong Tan wrote:
>>> This patchset adds two new VLAN feature.
>>>
>>> [patch 1] adds a new dynamic VLAN mode.
>>> [patch 2] adds support for 'QoS' field to PVID.
>>>
>>> Change log:
>>> V1->V2: modifies [patch 1]'s commit log, suggested by Jakub Kicinski.
>>
>> I don't like the idea that FW is choosing the driver behavior in a way
>> that's not observable via standard Linux APIs. This is the second time
>> a feature like that posted for a driver this week, and we should
>> discourage it.
> 
> Agreed, this is an unacceptable approach to driver features.
> 

Hi, Jakub & David.

As decribed in patch #1, there is a scenario which needs the dynamic
mode(port VLAN filter is always disabled, andVF VLAN filter is keep
disable until a non-zero VLAN ID being used for the function).

Is this mode selection provided through "ethtool --set-priv-flags"
more acceptable? Or is there any other better suggestion for this?

Thanks.

> .
>