netdev - Re: [net 3/3] can: isotp: add SF_BROADCAST support for functional addressing

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: <eefc4f80-da1c-fed5-7934-11615f1db0fc@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 5 Dec 2020 21:24:42 +0100
From:   Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:     Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
        Thomas Wagner <thwa1@....de>
Subject: Re: [net 3/3] can: isotp: add SF_BROADCAST support for functional
 addressing

On 12/5/20 12:26 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> 
> 
> On 05.12.20 04:44, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Fri,  4 Dec 2020 14:35:08 +0100 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>>> From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
>>>
>>> When CAN_ISOTP_SF_BROADCAST is set in the CAN_ISOTP_OPTS flags the CAN_ISOTP
>>> socket is switched into functional addressing mode, where only single frame
>>> (SF) protocol data units can be send on the specified CAN interface and the
>>> given tp.tx_id after bind().
>>>
>>> In opposite to normal and extended addressing this socket does not register a
>>> CAN-ID for reception which would be needed for a 1-to-1 ISOTP connection with a
>>> segmented bi-directional data transfer.
>>>
>>> Sending SFs on this socket is therefore a TX-only 'broadcast' operation.
>>
>> Unclear from this patch what is getting fixed. Looks a little bit like
>> a feature which could be added in a backward compatible way, no?
>> Is it only added for completeness of the ISOTP implementation?
>>
> 
> Yes, the latter.
> 
> It's a very small and simple tested addition and I hope it can still go 
> into the initial upstream process.

What about the (incremental?) change that Thomas Wagner posted?

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201204135557.55599-1-thwa1@web.de

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de  |
Vertretung West/Dortmund         | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |



Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)