netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 06/17] ethtool: support for netlink notifications

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]

Date:   Tue, 31 Jul 2018 08:46:00 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>,
        "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 06/17] ethtool: support for netlink
 notifications

Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 07:01:21PM CEST, mkubecek@...e.cz wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 03:16:55PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 02:53:12PM CEST, mkubecek@...e.cz wrote:
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> >diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> >index c1295c7a452e..c4b0c575d57e 100644
>> >--- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> >+++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> >@@ -2444,6 +2444,7 @@ enum netdev_cmd {
>> > 	NETDEV_CVLAN_FILTER_DROP_INFO,
>> > 	NETDEV_SVLAN_FILTER_PUSH_INFO,
>> > 	NETDEV_SVLAN_FILTER_DROP_INFO,
>> >+	NETDEV_ETHTOOL,
>> 
>> I don't understand why this goes through netdev notifier. What's the
>> reason?
>
>To allow triggering a notification from other code (ethtool ioctl or
>e.g. netdev_features_change()) when netlink interface is built as a
>module. If it's a (performance?) problem, an alternative could be having
>a global pointer which would be either null or point to ethtool_notify()
>depending on whether the module is loaded (and ready).
>
>(Which made me realize I forgot to handle a race between module
>unloading and processing a notification.)
>
>Another question is if we really need the option to build the netlink
>interface as a module. I must admit my main motivation to have it as
>a module is that it makes testing and debugging easier.

Yeah. It is very core thing. I think it does not have to be a module.