linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v7 2/5] ethtool: netlink: add ETHTOOL_MSG_MSE

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: <20251024161213.2ed58127@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 16:12:13 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon
 Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
 Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Kory Maincent
 <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>, Maxime Chevallier
 <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
 kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, Roan van Dijk
 <roan@...tonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 2/5] ethtool: netlink: add
 ETHTOOL_MSG_MSE_GET and wire up PHY MSE access

On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 15:18:04 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> Hi Jakub,
> 
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 06:13:43PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 12:31:44 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:  
> > > +      -
> > > +        name: supported-caps
> > > +        type: nest
> > > +        nested-attributes: bitset
> > > +        enum: phy-mse-capability  
> > 
> > This is read only, does it really have to be a bitset?  
> 
> It describes the capabilities of the driver/hardware. You can get always
> everything... Hm... I think we continue without capabilities for now and
> also remove the specific channel request.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying that it could be a basic
uint with appropriate enum rather than bitset? At least with YNL its
much easier to deal with. The main advantage of bitset is that you
can modify individual bits, but that doesn't apply to read-only fields.

Sorry if I'm confused.