netdev - Re: [patch net-next] bonding: create netlink event when bonding option is changed

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: <20140820111114.GA8421@mikrodark.usersys.redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Aug 2014 13:11:14 +0200
From:	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>
To:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, j.vosburgh@...il.com,
	andy@...yhouse.net, nikolay@...hat.com, dingtianhong@...wei.com,
	sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next] bonding: create netlink event when bonding
 option is changed

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 08:44:58AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:46:34PM CEST, gospo@...ulusnetworks.com wrote:
>>On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:37:48PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:34:01PM CEST, gospo@...ulusnetworks.com wrote:
>>> >On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 04:02:12PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
...snip...
>>> >>  	if (ret)
>>> >>  		bond_opt_error_interpret(bond, opt, ret, val);
>>> >> +	else
>>> >> +		call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_CHANGEINFODATA, bond->dev);
...snip...
>>My question was:  Is there a need for 2 netlink messages to indicate
>>that a bonding configuration change was needed when the config came over
>>netlink.  I did not see the need for 2 netlink messages in this case and
>>was asking for clarification from you.
>
>Imagine 2 applications. One is just monitoring netlink events ("ip
>mon"), the second is setting up bond via netlink. Now, the second sends
>a message to kernel, that is unicast to kernel. The first application
>does not see that message. Therefore there is need to generate the event
>message in kernel and send it back to userspace via multicast.
>That message the first application will see. And that is exactly what
>my patch is doing.

Seems fair, as there's no other way to catch those modifications, even
though they're known to the "changing" application.

Acked-by: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>
--
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