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  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:   Mon, 18 May 2020 16:37:57 +0100
From:   Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        <dcaratti@...hat.com>, <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
        <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/4] Implement classifier-action terse dump
 mode

On 15/05/2020 12:40, Vlad Buslov wrote:
> In order to
> significantly improve filter dump rate this patch sets implement new
> mode of TC filter dump operation named "terse dump" mode. In this mode
> only parameters necessary to identify the filter (handle, action cookie,
> etc.) and data that can change during filter lifecycle (filter flags,
> action stats, etc.) are preserved in dump output while everything else
> is omitted.
I realise I'm a bit late, but isn't this the kind of policy that shouldn't
 be hard-coded in the kernel?  I.e. if next year it turns out that some
 user needs one parameter that's been omitted here, but not the whole dump,
 are they going to want to add another mode to the uapi?
Should this not instead have been done as a set of flags to specify which
 pieces of information the caller wanted in the dump, rather than a mode
 flag selecting a pre-defined set?

-ed

Powered by blists - more mailing lists