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:	Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:25:05 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC RTNETLINK 00/09]: Netlink link creation API

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Patrick McHardy <> writes:
>>>I still think adding a IFLA_PARTNER or a custom attribute is cleaner
>>>in this case.  Slight semantic mismatches are the worst design bugs
>>>to correct.
>>Indeed, IFLA_PARTNER sounds like a better idea. I just suggested to
>>Pavel to create only a single device per newlink operation and binding
>>them later, what do you think about that?
> I don't think it solves much because we still need a way to report the
> partner device.

I was thinking of something like this:

ip link add veth0 type veth
ip link add veth1 partner veth0 type veth

ip would resolve veth0 to an ifindex and set IFLA_PARTNER. But Alexey
just raised a few good points, so this might not work.

> On the actual using side I think it makes the core of the driver much
> more difficult to get right.  
> Basically if we can't count on having a partner device we have to
> add NULL pointer checks and locking to the packet dispatch which
> is otherwise unnecessary.

All you'd need to do is keep the queue stopped until the device
is bound. No changes to rx or tx path neccessary.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists