netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] l2tp: Add ppp device name to L2TP ppp session data

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: <4BB45F81.1070801@katalix.com>
Date:	Thu, 01 Apr 2010 09:55:29 +0100
From:	James Chapman <jchapman@...alix.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] l2tp: Add ppp device name to L2TP ppp session
 data

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le jeudi 01 avril 2010 à 08:19 +0100, James Chapman a écrit :
> 
>> There might be thousands of L2TP sessions in some setups. Populating
>> sysfs with a link for each of those sessions isn't practical. The
>> existing /proc file dumps its info as a single text file for this
>> reason. I'd also like to provide the device name in the session netlink
>> message, which is the interface used by l2tp userspace, so I need a
>> kernel API to retrieve the device name from ppp.
>>
>> I like the suggestion of using debugfs for access to driver debug info
>> though. I propose leaving the /proc file for L2TPv2 only, removing the
>> L2TPv3 data that I added to the proc file in this patch series, to
>> retain compatibility with the existing driver. This would show only
>> L2TPv2 sessions and tunnels. For new driver functionality (L2TPv3 etc),
>> use debugfs. The debugfs files would dump lists in a similar form to the
>> current code, listing all tunnels (L2TPv2 and L2TPv3) in a single file.
>> Using debugfs gives more flexibility for adding additional info later,
>> as required. How does that sound?
>>
> 
> debugfs ? I dont get it, sorry.
> 
> Why not using netlink, as most iproute2 utilities do ?

I am using netlink. This is only for providing extra (convenience) debug
info from the kernel drivers. It's something I can easily ask users to
do if they have a problem.


-- 
James Chapman
Katalix Systems Ltd
http://www.katalix.com
Catalysts for your Embedded Linux software development

--
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