netdev - Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 0/2] net: hns3: adds two VLAN feature

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:   Wed, 27 May 2020 10:31:59 +0800
From:   tanhuazhong <tanhuazhong@...wei.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <salil.mehta@...wei.com>, <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 0/2] net: hns3: adds two VLAN feature



On 2020/5/22 17:35, tanhuazhong wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2020/5/22 5:37, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:17:07 -0700
>>
>>> On Thu, 21 May 2020 19:38:23 +0800 Huazhong Tan wrote:
>>>> This patchset adds two new VLAN feature.
>>>>
>>>> [patch 1] adds a new dynamic VLAN mode.
>>>> [patch 2] adds support for 'QoS' field to PVID.
>>>>
>>>> Change log:
>>>> V1->V2: modifies [patch 1]'s commit log, suggested by Jakub Kicinski.
>>>
>>> I don't like the idea that FW is choosing the driver behavior in a way
>>> that's not observable via standard Linux APIs. This is the second time
>>> a feature like that posted for a driver this week, and we should
>>> discourage it.
>>
>> Agreed, this is an unacceptable approach to driver features.
>>
> 
> Hi, Jakub & David.
> 
> As decribed in patch #1, there is a scenario which needs the dynamic
> mode(port VLAN filter is always disabled, andVF VLAN filter is keep
> disable until a non-zero VLAN ID being used for the function).
> 
> Is this mode selection provided through "ethtool --set-priv-flags"
> more acceptable? Or is there any other better suggestion for this?
> 
> Thanks.
> 

Hi, Jakub & David.

For patch#1, is it acceptable adding "ethtool --get-priv-flags"
to query the VLAN. If yes, I will send a RFC for it.

Best Regards.
Thanks.

>> .
>>