netdev - Re: [patch net-next rfc 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and delete alternative ifnames

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: <20190827093525.GB2250@nanopsycho>
Date:   Tue, 27 Aug 2019 11:35:25 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, dsahern@...il.com,
        roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        sthemmin@...rosoft.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 3/7] net: rtnetlink: add commands to add and
 delete alternative ifnames

Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 10:22:42AM CEST, davem@...emloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 09:08:08 +0200
>
>> Okay, so if I understand correctly, on top of separate commands for
>> add/del of alternative names, you suggest also get/dump to be separate
>> command and don't fill this up in existing newling/getlink command.
>
>I'm not sure what to do yet.
>
>David has a point, because the only way these ifnames are useful is
>as ways to specify and choose net devices.  So based upon that I'm
>slightly learning towards not using separate commands.

Well yeah, one can use it to handle existing commands instead of
IFLA_NAME.

But why does it rule out separate commands? I think it is cleaner than
to put everything in poor setlink messages :/ The fact that we would
need to add "OP" to the setlink message just feels of. Other similar
needs may show up in the future and we may endup in ridiculous messages
like:

SETLINK
  IFLA_NAME eth0
  IFLA_ATLNAME_LIST (nest)
      IFLA_ALTNAME_OP add
      IFLA_ALTNAME somereallylongname 
      IFLA_ALTNAME_OP del
      IFLA_ALTNAME somereallyreallylongname 
      IFLA_ALTNAME_OP add
      IFLA_ALTNAME someotherreallylongname 
  IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_LIST (nest)
      IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP add
      ...
      IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP del
      ...
      IFLA_SOMETHING_ELSE_OP add
      ...

I don't know what to think about it. Rollbacks are going to be pure hell :/