netdev - Re: ethtool - manual changes in ethtool-copy.h

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]

Message-ID: <CANP3RGf-MmOYgBV4fQwoRbg_+OAvKTFKGM2EorR3ig9WfevHZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Jan 2019 17:57:12 -0800
From:   Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
To:     "John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        Linux NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ethtool - manual changes in ethtool-copy.h

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 1:00 PM John W. Linville <linville@...driver.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:28:42PM +0100, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm sorry I didn't notice earlier but ethtool commit 4df55c81996d
> > ("ethtool: change to new sane powerpc64 kernel headers") adds changes to
> > ethtool-copy.h which are not in sync with kernel file it is generated
> > from.
> >
> > This file is supposed to be a copy of the sanitized kernel UAPI header,
> > i.e. what you get as include/linux/ethtool.h by "make headers_install"
> > in kernel tree. (The copy in ethtool git is currently a bit behind but
> > the missing recent changes only modify comments so that it's not really
> > a problem.)
> >
> > Modifying this file manually would mean that anyone who would update it
> > in the future (to sync with kernel changes) could not simply copy the
> > sanitized kernel header but would have to make sure to add your fragment
> > to it.
> >
> > As you only need to define the __SANE_USERSPACE_TYPES__ macro (on
> > ppc64), it might be possible to achieve the same goal in Makefile.
> >
> > Michal Kubecek
>
> Ooops -- thanks for noticing that Michal!
>
> Maciej, how soon might you be able to address this? What is the effect
> of simply reverting it? Just warnings on ppc64 builds?

Would this change be acceptable in the kernel header file this is
generated from?
Or would it mess something up?  I imagine it would be a problem... for
other users?
If so then could we just set this in ethtool Makefile... perhaps even
just blindly for all archs?