netdev - Re: [RFC net-next] net: extend netdev features

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: <20210710081120.5570fb87@hermes.local>
Date:   Sat, 10 Jul 2021 08:11:20 -0700
From:   Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:     Jian Shen <shenjian15@...wei.com>
Cc:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...neuler.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] net: extend netdev features

On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 17:40:47 +0800
Jian Shen <shenjian15@...wei.com> wrote:

> For the prototype of netdev_features_t is u64, and the number
> of netdevice feature bits is 64 now. So there is no space to
> introduce new feature bit.
> 
> I did a small change for this. Keep the prototype of
> netdev_feature_t, and extend the feature members in struct
> net_device to an array of netdev_features_t. So more features
> bits can be used.
> 
> As this change, some functions which use netdev_features_t as
> parameter or returen value will be affected.
> I did below changes:
> a. parameter: "netdev_features_t" to "netdev_features_t *"
> b. return value: "netdev_feature_t" to "void", and add
> "netdev_feature_t *" as output parameter.
> 
> I kept some functions no change, which are surely useing the
> first 64 bit of net device features now, such as function
> nedev_add_tso_features(). In order to minimize to changes.
> 
> For the features are array now, so it's unable to do logical
> operation directly. I introduce a inline function set for
> them, including "netdev_features_and/andnot/or/xor/equal/empty".
> 
> For NETDEV_FEATURE_COUNT may be more than 64, so the shift
> operation for NETDEV_FEATURE_COUNT is illegal. I changed some
> macroes and functions, which does shift opertion with it.
> 
> I haven't finished all the changes, for it affected all the
> drivers which use the feature, need more time and test. I
> sent this RFC patch, want to know whether this change is
> acceptable, and how to improve it.
> 
> Any comments will be helpful.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jian Shen <shenjian15@...wei.com>

Infrastructure changes must be done as part of the patch that
needs the new feature bit. It might be that your feature bit is
not accepted as part of the review cycle, or a better alternative
is proposed.