linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] ethtool: fix clearing of WoL flags

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:   Thu, 19 Oct 2023 09:20:31 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] ethtool: fix clearing of WoL flags

On 10/19/23 06:27, Köry Maincent wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 12:50:48 +0200
> Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:21:14PM +0200, Köry Maincent wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:51:40 +0200 > Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The issue was indeed introduced by commit 108a36d07c01 ("ethtool: Fix
>>>> mod state of verbose no_mask bitset"). The problem is that a "no mask"
>>>> verbose bitset only contains bit attributes for bits to be set. This
>>>> worked correctly before this commit because we were always updating
>>>> a zero bitmap (since commit 6699170376ab ("ethtool: fix application of
>>>> verbose no_mask bitset"), that is) so that the rest was left zero
>>>> naturally. But now the 1->0 change (old_val is true, bit not present in
>>>> netlink nest) no longer works.
>>>
>>> Doh I had not seen this issue! Thanks you for reporting it.
>>> I will send the revert then and will update the fix for next merge-window.
>>
>> Something like the diff below (against current mainline) might do the
>> trick but it's just an idea, not even build tested.
> 
> Seems a good idea without adding too much complexity to the code.
> Will try that and send it in next merge window.

Not sure what you mean by next merge window, we need a fix for right 
now, or we need to revert 6699170376ab ("ethtool: fix application of 
verbose no_mask bitset").
-- 
Florian