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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2022 09:33:41 +0000 From: <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com> To: <petrm@...dia.com> CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>, <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <Lars.Povlsen@...rochip.com>, <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>, <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <joe@...ches.com>, <linux@...linux.org.uk>, <Horatiu.Vultur@...rochip.com>, <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/6] net: dcb: add new pcp selector to app object Den Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 10:22:48AM +0200 skrev Petr Machata: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com> writes: > > > Right, I see your point. But. First thought; this starts to look a little > > hackish. > > So it is. That's what poking backward compatible holes in an existing > API gets you. Look at modern C++ syntax for an extreme example :) > > But read Jakub's email. It looks like we don't actually need to worry > about this. > > > Looking through the 802.1Q-2018 std again, sel bits 0, 6 and 7 are > > reserved (implicit for future standard implementation?). Do we know of > > any cases, where a new standard version would introduce new values beyond > > what was reserved in the first place for future use? I dont know myself. > > > > I am just trying to raise a question of whether using the std APP attr > > with a new high (255) selector, really could be preferred over this new > > non-std APP attr with new packed payload. > > Yeah. We'll need to patch lldpad anyway. We can basically choose which > way we patch it. And BTW, using the too-short attribute payload of > course breaks it _as well_, because they don't do any payload size > validation. Right, unless we reconstruct std app entry payload from the "too-short" attribute payload, before adding it the the app list or passing it to the driver. Anyway. Considering Jakub's mail. I think this patch version with a non-std attribute to do non-std app table contributions separates non-std from std stuff nicely and is preffered over just adding the new selector. So if we can agree on this, I will prepare a new v. with the other changes suggested. Wrt. lldpad we can then patch it to react on attrs or selectors > 7.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists