netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/4] selftests: extract common functions in ethtool-common.sh

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:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:38:21 +0100
From:   Antonio Cardace <acardace@...hat.com>
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/4] selftests: extract common functions in
 ethtool-common.sh

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 05:17:02PM +0100, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 12:16:54AM +0100, Antonio Cardace wrote:
> > Factor out some useful functions so that they can be reused
> > by other ethtool-netdevsim scripts.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Antonio Cardace <acardace@...hat.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
> 
> Just one comment:
> 
> [...]
> > +function get_netdev_name {
> > +    local -n old=$1
> > +
> > +    new=$(ls /sys/class/net)
> > +
> > +    for netdev in $new; do
> > +	for check in $old; do
> > +            [ $netdev == $check ] && break
> > +	done
> > +
> > +	if [ $netdev != $check ]; then
> > +	    echo $netdev
> > +	    break
> > +	fi
> > +    done
> > +}
> [...]
> > +function make_netdev {
> > +    # Make a netdevsim
> > +    old_netdevs=$(ls /sys/class/net)
> > +
> > +    if ! $(lsmod | grep -q netdevsim); then
> > +	modprobe netdevsim
> > +    fi
> > +
> > +    echo $NSIM_ID > /sys/bus/netdevsim/new_device
> > +    echo `get_netdev_name old_netdevs`
> > +}
> 
> This would be rather unpredictable if someone ran another selftest (or
> anything else that would create a network device) in parallel. IMHO it
> would be safer (and easier) to get the name of the new device from
> 
>   /sys/bus/netdevsim/devices/netdevsim${NSIM_ID}/net/
> 
> But as this is not new code and you are just moving existing code, it
> can be done in a separate patch.

Yes it does make sense, I can send a patch for this once this is merged.

Thanks for the review.

Antonio