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  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:   Wed, 21 Jul 2021 18:02:57 +0200
From:   Heiner Kallweit <>
To:     Andrew Lunn <>
Cc:     Pavel Machek <>,
        Tony Nguyen <>,,, Kurt Kanzenbach <>,,,,,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
        Dvora Fuxbrumer <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] igc: Export LEDs

On 21.07.2021 16:35, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Thanks for the hint, Andrew. If I make &netdev->dev the parent,
>> then I get:
>> ll /sys/class/leds/
>> total 0
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jul 20 21:37 led0 -> ../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.0/0000:03:00.0/net/enp3s0/led0
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jul 20 21:37 led1 -> ../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.0/0000:03:00.0/net/enp3s0/led1
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Jul 20 21:37 led2 -> ../../devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.0/0000:03:00.0/net/enp3s0/led2
>> Now the (linked) LED devices are under /sys/class/net/<ifname>, but still
>> the primary LED devices are under /sys/class/leds and their names have
>> to be unique therefore. The LED subsystem takes care of unique names,
>> but in case of a second network interface the LED device name suddenly
>> would be led0_1 (IIRC). So the names wouldn't be predictable, and I think
>> that's not what we want.
> We need input from the LED maintainers, but do we actually need the
> symbolic links in /sys/class/leds/? For this specific use case, not
> generally. Allow an LED to opt out of the /sys/class/leds symlink.

The links are created here:

-> device_create_with_groups()
   -> device_add()
      -> device_add_class_symlinks()

So it seems we'd need an extension to the device core to support
class link opt-out.

> If we could drop those, we can relax the naming requirements so that
> the names is unique to a parent device, not globally unique.
>     Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists