netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 1/2] ethtool: add speed/duplex validation functions

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56B32FD8.7020407@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:	Thu, 4 Feb 2016 12:02:48 +0100
From:	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
	davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 1/2] ethtool: add speed/duplex validation
 functions

On 02/04/2016 12:32 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed,  3 Feb 2016 04:04:36 +0100
> Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org> wrote:
> 
>>  
>> +static inline int ethtool_validate_speed(__u32 speed)
>> +{
> 
> 
> No need for inline.
> 
This is defined in a header, if it's not inline you start getting
"defined but not used" warnings.

> But why check for valid value at all. At some point in the
> future, there will be yet another speed adopted by some standard body
> and the switch statement would need another value.
> 
> Why not accept any value? This is a virtual device.
> 
It was moved near the defined values so everyone adding a new speed would
remember to update the validation function as well. That being said, I don't
object to being able to set any custom speed to the virtio_net device especially
when there're physical devices that can have speeds outside of these defines.

Michael do you have any objections if I respin without the speed validation ?

Thanks,
 Nik