netdev - Re: [patch net-next 09/10] net: sch: prio: Add offload ability for grafting a child

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:   Fri, 2 Mar 2018 09:21:56 -0500
From:   Alexander Aring <aring@...atatu.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        nogahf@...lanox.com, yuvalm@...lanox.com,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, idosch@...lanox.com,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, kernel@...atatu.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 09/10] net: sch: prio: Add offload ability for
 grafting a child

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 3:37 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
> Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 04:48:40AM CET, kubakici@...pl wrote:
>>On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 22:38:50 -0500, Alexander Aring wrote:
>>> I guess to make extack working, you need to return an errno if failed.
>>
>>AFAIK extack is printed as a warning if operation did not fail.
>
> Yes, I checked this and it is printed as warning.

ouch, so far I know extack it allows only one messages delivered back
to the user space.

If we introduce a warning in the successful path here, it could be
that in the callpath (after "successful" part of this callback), that
somebody else want to add a warning and overwrites actually your
warning (even, he is not aware that this warning was set - okay I
suppose you can do another check on NULL and set a warning, that
somebody overwrites a warning :-D).

If extack messages get's append and is some kind of for_each_nested
string in netlink -> we have no problem, but I guess this not how it's
working. :-/

- Alex