linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] i40e: Prevent unwanted interface name changes

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: <aKXqVqj_bUefe1Nj@mozart.vkv.me>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 08:31:34 -0700
From: Calvin Owens <calvin@...nvd.org>
To: Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Jedrzej Jagielski <jedrzej.jagielski@...el.com>,
	Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] i40e: Prevent unwanted interface name changes

On Wednesday 08/20 at 08:42 +0200, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 6:30 AM Calvin Owens <calvin@...nvd.org> wrote:
> > The same naming regression which was reported in ixgbe and fixed in
> > commit e67a0bc3ed4f ("ixgbe: prevent from unwanted interface name
> > changes") still exists in i40e.
> >
> > Fix i40e by setting the same flag, added in commit c5ec7f49b480
> > ("devlink: let driver opt out of automatic phys_port_name generation").
> >
> > Fixes: 9e479d64dc58 ("i40e: Add initial devlink support")
> 
> But this one's almost two years old. By now, there may be more users
> relying on the new name than on the old one.
> Michal

Well, I was relying on the new ixgbe names, and I had to revert them
all in a bunch of configs yesterday after e67a0bc3ed4f :)

Should e67a0bc3ed4f be reverted instead? Why is ixgbe special?

Thanks,
Calvin