linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] hv_netvsc: Mark VF as slave before exposing it to user-mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <MN0PR21MB32641FE761E83A68CC627FFCCEDDA@MN0PR21MB3264.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2023 21:07:22 +0000
From:   Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        "longli@...uxonhyperv.com" <longli@...uxonhyperv.com>
CC:     KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] hv_netvsc: Mark VF as slave before exposing it to
 user-mode

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] hv_netvsc: Mark VF as slave before exposing it to user-mode
> 
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 15:50:50 -0700
> longli@...uxonhyperv.com wrote:
> 
> > @@ -2347,6 +2342,12 @@ static int netvsc_register_vf(struct net_device
> *vf_netdev)
> >  	if (!ndev)
> >  		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >
> > +	if (event == NETDEV_POST_INIT) {
> > +		/* set slave flag before open to prevent IPv6 addrconf */
> > +		vf_netdev->flags |= IFF_SLAVE;
> > +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	net_device_ctx = netdev_priv(ndev);
> >  	netvsc_dev = rtnl_dereference(net_device_ctx->nvdev);
> >  	if (!netvsc_dev || rtnl_dereference(net_device_ctx->vf_netdev))
> > @@ -2753,8 +2754,9 @@ static int netvsc_netdev_event(struct notifier_block
> *this,
> >  		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >
> >  	switch (event) {
> > +	case NETDEV_POST_INIT:
> >  	case NETDEV_REGISTER:
> > -		return netvsc_register_vf(event_dev);
> > +		return netvsc_register_vf(event_dev, event);
> 
> Although correct, this is an awkward way to write this.
> There are two events which call register_vf() but the post init one short circuits
> and doesn't really register the VF.
> 
> The code is clearer if flag is set in switch statement.
> 

I will add a dedicated function to handle NETDEV_POST_INIT.

Thanks,
Long