netdev - Re: [net-next] bonding: don't allow the master to become its slave

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:	Thu, 09 Aug 2012 16:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	fubar@...ibm.com
Cc:	bhutchings@...arflare.com, jpirko@...hat.com, fbl@...hat.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, andy@...yhouse.net, lchiquitto@...e.com
Subject: Re: [net-next] bonding: don't allow the master to become its slave

From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 14:27:08 -0700

> 	If that's hard to do (and it might be; I'm not aware of a
> standard way to run up and down those stacks of interfaces, which might
> not always be vlans in the middle), there's still the priv_flags &
> IFF_BONDING test that bonding could (and probably should) do itself as
> well.  The team driver could presumably have a similar test, although I
> seem to recall that team was allowed to nest.
> 
> 	FWIW, I've seen both the top and bottom halves of that picture
> in use (i.e., bonds consisting of vlans as slaves or bonds with vlans
> configured above them), but not combined as in your diagram.

We're basically looking for cycles in a complex graph.

Some combination of Jay and Ben's most recent patches, with some minor
modifications, ought to do it.
--
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