netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] genetlink: support per-command policy dump

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: <20201002080944.2f63ccf5@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Oct 2020 08:09:44 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
        jiri@...nulli.us, mkubecek@...e.cz, dsahern@...nel.org,
        pablo@...filter.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] genetlink: support per-command policy
 dump

On Fri, 02 Oct 2020 17:04:11 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > Yeah, that'd work. I'd probably wonder if we shouldn't do
> > > 
> > > [OP_POLICY]
> > >   [OP] -> (u32, u32)
> > > 
> > > in a struct with two u32's, since that's quite a bit more compact.  
> > 
> > What do we do if the op doesn't have a dump or do callback?
> > 0 is a valid policy ID, sadly :(  
> 
> Hm, good point. We could do -1 since that can't ever be reached though.
> 
> But compactness isn't really that necessary here anyway, so ...

Cool, sounds like a plan.

This series should be good to merge, then.