linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH iwl-net 0/5] ice: LLDP support for VFs

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: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 09:08:36 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
 <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mateusz Pacuszka
 <mateuszx.pacuszka@...el.com>, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Lukasz Plachno <lukasz.plachno@...el.com>, Jakub Buchocki
 <jakubx.buchocki@...el.com>, Pawel Kaminski <pawel.kaminski@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, Michal Swiatkowski
 <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>, Mateusz Polchlopek
 <mateusz.polchlopek@...el.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 "Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "Pawel Chmielewski" <pawel.chmielewski@...el.com>, Jesse Brandeburg
 <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net 0/5] ice: LLDP support for VFs

On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 20:33:04 +0100 Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > This is an LLDP agent which runs as part of the NIC FW, AFAIU, not about
> > forwarding or filtering.
> > 
> > They already have the priv flag, so best to reuse that. If not possible
> > we can explore options, but as Larysa mentioned herself in the cover
> > letter sysfs is probably low on the preference list :(
> 
> FW agent is disabled NIC-wide, so only PF should be able to set such flag.

Sorry, then I misread. If it's about which VF gets the LLDP traffic
from the _wire_, then I'm with Jiri. It's a basic forwarding problem,
isn't it? Match on EtherType and forward?

> The lazy part of me likes the private flag direction, because just
> replacing sysfs entries with corresponding private flags would make
> patch look better while not changing the implementation much.
> 
> I guess, treating it like a normal eswitch configuration would be
> ideal, but it would not be purely generic, as there is an added level
> of complexity because of FW Agent interactions.