linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ipv6: create ra_mtu proc file to only record mtu in RA

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: <20210602031502.31600-1-rocco.yue@mediatek.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Jun 2021 11:15:02 +0800
From:   Rocco Yue <rocco.yue@...iatek.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
CC:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <wsd_upstream@...iatek.com>,
        <rocco.yue@...il.com>, Rocco Yue <rocco.yue@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: create ra_mtu proc file to only record mtu in RA

On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 18:38 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
On 6/1/21 3:16 AM, Rocco Yue wrote:
> > For this patch set, if RA message carries the mtu option,
> > "proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/<iface>/ra_mtu" will be updated to the
> > mtu value carried in the last RA message received, and ra_mtu
> > is an independent proc file, which is not affected by the update
> > of interface mtu value.
> 
> I am not a fan of more /proc/sys files.
> 
> You are adding it to devconf which is good. You can add another link
> attribute, e.g., IFLA_RA_MTU, and have it returned on link queries.
> 
> Make sure the attribute can not be sent in a NEWLINK or SETLINK request;
> it should be read-only for GETLINK.

Thanks for your review and advice.
Do you mean that I should keep the ra_mtu proc and add an another extra netlink msg?
Or only use netlink msg instead of ra_mtu proc?
I will do it.

Thanks,
Rocco