netdev - Question about setting custom STAB

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAA0ESdpYVxx6Ra94hV=1RWH1+OZHFG3_7B-bpEicgwHiYvTczg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 May 2019 11:59:13 -0500
From:   "robert.mccabe" <robert.mccabe@...kwellcollins.com>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Question about setting custom STAB

Awhile ago I submitted this iproute2 patch:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/784165/

And the corresponding kernel patch:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/783696/

To allow the setting of arbitrary qdisc size table so that the packet
scheduler code in __qdisc_calculate_pkt_len charges the correct
bandwidth per my custom link layer.  These patches were not applied
because the reviewers didn't like that I added another enumeration to
the kernel's UAPI:  TC_LINKLAYER_CUSTOM.

My question is: why is the setting of the STAB not exposed to
userspace applications?  This seems to be a powerful feature that is
more generic than hard-coding the STABs for TC_LINKLAYER_ETHERNET and
TC_LINK_LAYER_ATM.  Or maybe I'm missing something and there is
mechanism to do this without my iproute2 patch?

P.S. Sorry for the apparent spam.  My previous email's "From:" address
was messed up.