| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:11:14 -0500 From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Stable interface index option On (12/01/15 16:50), Maximilian Wilhelm wrote: > What I have in mind is that the user can supply a list of (ifname -> > ifindex) entries via a sysfs/procfs interface and if such a list is > present, the kernel will search the list for every ifname which is Having the user supply such a list is hazardous for the reason below, esp if you consider that you can have virtual interfaces that take up that number. It also allows for a sparse ifindex number space, which can be inefficient (thus the cisco choice) > What I'm not sure about is what to do if there is any entry in the > list but the ifindex is already in use. One option would be to fail > the register call because the user wanted this particular ifindex .. If you want to do this, it's simpler to have the kernel track 2 separate indices (the packed index and the sparse snmp-index) per net_device. Changes to achieve it are non-trivial, of course, and that's why I'd question how badly this is needed. the other issue to confront is- what do you want ioctls like SIOCGIFINDEX to return- the packed one or the sparse one? What about if_nametoindex etc? If they return the sparse index, can they use it back with existing ifioctl and other calls? i.e., API compat will have some rough edges. --Sowmini -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists