netdev - Re: [ethtool PATCH v4 11/11] ethtool.c: support absence of v4 sockets

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:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 23:23:29 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:	David Decotigny <ddecotig@...il.com>
Cc:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...hat.com>,
	Vidya Sagar Ravipati <vidya@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Subject: Re: [ethtool PATCH v4 11/11] ethtool.c: support absence of v4
 sockets

On Tue, 2016-03-15 at 16:19 -0700, David Decotigny wrote:
> will send a v5 shortly without this patch: question below.
> 
> about this patch: this is in prevision of a world where INET can be
> compiled out. So it is not something that matters today with current
> kernels.

OK.

> Now, as you mentioned in another patch, the only socket that survives
> various reasonable CONFIG_* gymnastics is netlink. So even though
> non-IPv4 kernels with IP support is not feasible today, I believe
> there is some logic to using netlink sockets for ethtool purposes,
> instead of IPv4 or IPv6 sockets. Shall I propose a patch to add
> ethtool support on AF_NETLINK sockets, and update the tool to try
> AF_INET first for backward compatibility reasons, then fallback to
> AF_NETLINK?

Yes, please do that.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Hoare's Law of Large Problems:
        Inside every large problem is a small problem struggling to get out.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)