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  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]
Date:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 23:23:23 +0100
From:   Petr Machata <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:     Ido Schimmel <>,,,,,,,
        Ido Schimmel <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/6] net: sched: Add centralized RED flag checking

Jakub Kicinski <> writes:

> On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:48:24 +0100 Petr Machata wrote:
>> > The only flags which are validated today are the gRED per-vq ones, which
>> > are a recent addition and were validated from day one.
>> Do you consider the validation as such to be a problem? Because that
>> would mean that the qdiscs that have not validated flags this way
>> basically cannot be extended ever ("a buggy userspace used to get a
>> quiet slicing of flags, and now they mean something").
> I just remember leaving it as is when I was working on GRED, because
> of the potential breakage. The uAPI policy is what it is, then again
> we probably lose more by making the code of these ancient Qdiscs ugly
> than we win :(
> I don't feel like I can ack it with clear conscience tho.

Just to make sure -- are you opposed to adding a new flag, or to
validation? At least the adaptative flag was added years after the
others in 2011. I wasn't paying much attention to kernel back then, but
I think the ABI rules are older than that.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists