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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 09:26:55 +0200 From: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com> To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> Cc: Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@...el.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>, "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>, Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>, Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>, Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@...el.com>, ciara.loftus@...el.com, intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/11] libbpf: add flags to umem config On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 09:19, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 12:34 AM Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com> wrote: > > [...] > > > > Old application, dynamically linked to new libbpf.so will crash, > > right? Old application passes old version of xsk_umem_config, and new > > library accesses (non-existing) flag struct member. > > I think we have similar problems for all the _xattr type of commands > (as well some of btf stuff accepting extra opts structs). How is this > problem solved in general? Do we version same function multiple times, > one for each added field? It feels like there should be some better > way to handle this... > If the size of the struct was passed as an argument (and extra care is taken when adding members to the struct), it could be handled w/o versioning... but that's not the case here. :-( Versioning is a mess to deal with, so I'd be happy if it could be avoided...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists