netdev - Re: [PATCH v7 10/33] net: dummy

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: <CANq1E4TCW_bnbTYacnfJHRvZAcOYnSgqxytHk26EaWeQKkphGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2014 12:26:25 +0200
From:	David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
To:	Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>
Cc:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>,
	dingtianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>,
	Tan Xiaojun <tanxiaojun@...wei.com>,
	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/33] net: dummy - set name assign type

Hi

>> The same goes for NET_NAME_USER and NET_NAME_RENAMED. These are the same
>> from a kernel point of view.
>
> You mean to collapse the two, and just label renamed interfaces
> NET_NAME_USER instead?

I have no real objections to merging NAME_USER and NAME_RENAMED. Both
values imply that there is a user-space authority that applied some
kind of rules to the naming-scheme. Therefore, anyone reacting to
those names should better treat them equally and fix the
naming-authority instead of overwriting it.

However, at the same time I think there's no real harm in keeping them
separate, either. My original thinking was to provide a second layer
for anyone overwriting system defaults. For instance, if there's a
user-space given name and a system-administrator wants to rename that
for administrative purposes, they can safely match on NAME_USER and be
sure, it wasn't renamed, yet. If it is set to NAME_RENAMED, though,
then the administrator has some kind of safety-net that tells him he
already has a rule that renamed the device and he shouldn't add
another one (like placing one in initrd and one in the real root).

Anyhow, if no-one cares about that, please go ahead and squash both
into NET_NAME_USER.

Thanks
David
--
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