netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/04]: VLAN vs. packet socket inconsistencies

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:	Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:38:50 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	kaber@...sh.net
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/04]: VLAN vs. packet socket inconsistencies

From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT)

> From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:30:04 +0200
> 
> > That sounds good. Userspace needs to know about the size of
> > the tpacket_hdr before setting the ring parameters so it can
> > size the ring frames appropriately for the largest packet size
> > it wants to receive. This means the offset field in the
> > tpacket_hdr is redundant, so I'll just add a getsockopt
> > option for getting the size. Unless we want to be able to
> > include only a partial tpacket_hdr, but I don't think that
> > would be very useful.
> 
> Ok, in that case using a getsockopt() to query the size sounds great.

BTW, what you might want to do is say that if the user
makes the new getsockopt() size query, he understands
and wants the new style tpacket_hdr layout.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html