netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v12 09/11] ptp: extend input argument for getcrosstimestamp API

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 23 May 2020 18:42:20 -0700
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:     Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@....com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@....com, john.stultz@...aro.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, maz@...nel.org,
        Mark.Rutland@....com, will@...nel.org, suzuki.poulose@....com,
        steven.price@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, Steve.Capper@....com, Kaly.Xin@....com,
        justin.he@....com, Wei.Chen@....com, nd@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 09/11] ptp: extend input argument for
 getcrosstimestamp API

On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 04:37:22PM +0800, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> sometimes we may need tell getcrosstimestamp call back how to perform
> itself. Extending input arguments for getcrosstimestamp API to offer more
> exquisite control for the operation.

This text does not offer any justification for the change in API.
 
> diff --git a/include/linux/ptp_clock_kernel.h b/include/linux/ptp_clock_kernel.h
> index c602670bbffb..ba765647e54b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/ptp_clock_kernel.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ptp_clock_kernel.h
> @@ -133,7 +133,8 @@ struct ptp_clock_info {
>  	int (*gettimex64)(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp, struct timespec64 *ts,
>  			  struct ptp_system_timestamp *sts);
>  	int (*getcrosststamp)(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp,
> -			      struct system_device_crosststamp *cts);
> +			      struct system_device_crosststamp *cts,
> +			      long *flag);

Well, you ignored the kernel doc completely.  But in any case, I must
NAK this completely opaque and mysterious change.  You want to add a
random pointer to some flag?  I don't think so.

Thanks,
Richard