linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v1 1/2] netlink: let len field used to parse type-not-care nested attrs

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: <20230801194949.GC53714@unreal>
Date:   Tue, 1 Aug 2023 22:49:49 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lin Ma <linma@....edu.cn>, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, fw@...len.de,
        yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com, jgg@...pe.ca, markzhang@...dia.com,
        phaddad@...dia.com, yuancan@...wei.com, ohartoov@...dia.com,
        chenzhongjin@...wei.com, aharonl@...dia.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 1/2] netlink: let len field used to parse
 type-not-care nested attrs

On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 10:57:26AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2023 11:11:17 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > IMHO, you are lowering too much the separation line between simple vs.
> > advanced use cases. 
> > 
> > I had no idea that my use-case of passing nested netlink array is counted
> > as advanced usage.
> 
> Agreed, that's a fair point. I'm guessing it was inspired by the
> ethtool stats? (Which in hindsight were a mistake on my part.)

I don't remember which part of kernel can be blamed for it. :)

> 
> For the longest time there was no docs or best practices for netlink.
> We have the documentation and more infrastructure in place now.
> I hope if you wrote the code today the distinction would have been
> clearer.
> 
> If we start adding APIs for various one-(two?)-offs from the past
> we'll never dig ourselves out of the "no idea what's the normal use
> of these APIs" hole..

I agree with this sentence, just afraid that it is unrealistic goal, due
to extensive flexibility in netlink UAPI toward user-space, which allows
you to shoot yourself in the foot without even noticing it.

Thanks