netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] ipv6 addrconf: add new sysctl 'router_solicitation_max

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: <8e332a23-5653-1e70-7c74-e7bcbbe0884a@stressinduktion.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:49:47 +0200
From:   Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:     Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Erik Kline <ek@...gle.com>,
        Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/7] ipv6 addrconf: add new sysctl
 'router_solicitation_max_interval'

On 27.09.2016 04:30, Maciej Żenczykowski wrote:
>> Is seconds granular enough?
> 
> The only reason why one would ever want to go into fractions of
> seconds would be some sort of unittesting with very low delays.
> 
> In any normal environment the max is going to be tens if not hundreds
> or thousands of seconds.
> 
> Also note that the delay and interval (ie. not max interval) are also
> currently exported in seconds, so having more granularity for
> max_seconds is kind of pointless.
> 
> I have been considering whether I could make proc_dointvec_jiffies
> accept floating point input (and output) though... although that seems
> a little harder and probably out of scope of this change.

Good point. Using ms should actually be easy, instead of
proc_dointvec_jiffies you can use proc_dointvec_ms_jiffies.

It seems good practice to add a _ms then to the sysctl, too.

I am fine with both ways.

Bye,
Hannes