netdev - Re: [PATCH -next] qlcnic: fail when try to setup unsupported features

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: <1277823923.2112.26.camel@achroite.uk.solarflarecom.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Jun 2010 16:05:23 +0100
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>
Cc:	Amit Salecha <amit.salecha@...gic.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>,
	Anirban Chakraborty <anirban.chakraborty@...gic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] qlcnic: fail when try to setup unsupported
 features

On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 17:00 +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:41:24 +0100
> Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 15:18 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 16:14 +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > My plan is something like that:
> > > > 
> > > > static const struct ethtool_ops my_ethtool_ops = {
> > > >         .get_flags              = ethtool_op_get_flags,
> > > >         .set_flags              = ethtool_op_set_flags,
> > > > 	.supported_flags	= ETH_FLAG_LRO
> > > > }
> > > > 
> > > > Plus op->supported_flags check in ethtool_op_set_flags. That will allow
> > > > to define flags per driver. There is also possible to add supported_flags
> > > > to netdev, but I would like to avoid that - in such case drivers can use
> > > > custom .set_flags function.
> > > 
> > > Sounds good to me.
> > 
> > On second thoughts, this is not going work - supported_flags may need to
> > be different for different chips handled by the same driver.  
> 
> I thought about driver custom ethtool_ops::set_flags in that case.
> 
> > In fact,
> > this is already the case in sfc.  So I think you should do what I
> > suggested previously - add a supported_flags parameter to
> > ethtool_op_set_flags.
> 
> What about call from net/core/ethtool.c ? 

ethtool_op_set_flags() doesn't provide a correct default behaviour since
it ignores unknown flags.  So it cannot be used directly as an
implementation of ethtool_ops::set_flags even now.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
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