netdev - Re: [patch net-next rfc 7/7] net: rtnetlink: add possibility to use alternative names as message handle

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: <20190720072250.GJ2230@nanopsycho>
Date:   Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:22:50 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        sthemmin@...rosoft.com, dsahern@...il.com, dcbw@...hat.com,
        mkubecek@...e.cz, andrew@...n.ch, parav@...lanox.com,
        saeedm@...lanox.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 7/7] net: rtnetlink: add possibility to use
 alternative names as message handle

Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 05:59:27AM CEST, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 13:00:29 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
>> index 1fa30d514e3f..68ad12a7fc4d 100644
>> --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c
>> +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
>> @@ -1793,6 +1793,8 @@ static const struct nla_policy ifla_policy[IFLA_MAX+1] = {
>>  	[IFLA_MAX_MTU]		= { .type = NLA_U32 },
>>  	[IFLA_ALT_IFNAME_MOD]	= { .type = NLA_STRING,
>>  				    .len = ALTIFNAMSIZ - 1 },
>> +	[IFLA_ALT_IFNAME]	= { .type = NLA_STRING,
>> +				    .len = ALTIFNAMSIZ - 1 },
>
>What's the disadvantage of just letting IFLA_IFNAME to get longer 
>on input? Is it just that the handling would be asymmetrical?

Hmm, that might work. But the problem is that sometimes the IFLA_IFNAME
is used as a handle, but sometimes it is used to carry the ifname
(newlink, changename). That might be a bit confusing and the code would
be harder to follow. I don't know...


>
>>  };
>>  
>>  static const struct nla_policy ifla_info_policy[IFLA_INFO_MAX+1] = {
>