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]

Date:   Fri, 02 Oct 2020 17:13:28 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
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, 2020-10-02 at 08:09 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> 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.

I suppose, I thought you wanted to change it to have separate dump/do
policies? Whatever you like there, I don't really care much :)

But I can also change my patches later to separately advertise dump/do
policies, and simply always use the same one for now.

But this series does conflict with the little bugfix I also sent, could
you please take a look?

https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20201002094604.480c760e3c47.I7811da1539351a26cd0e5a10b98a8842cfbc1b55@changeid/

I'm not really sure how to handle.

Thanks,
johannes