netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 8/9] net: delay device_del until run

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:   Tue, 05 Oct 2021 17:21:59 +0200
From:   Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, stephen@...workplumber.org,
        herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 8/9] net: delay device_del until run_todo

Quoting Jakub Kicinski (2021-09-29 15:31:26)
> 
> Well, it's a little wobbly but I think the direction is sane.

> FWIW the other two pieces of feedback I have is try to avoid the
> synchronize_net() in patch 7 and add a new helper for the name
> checking, which would return bool. The callers don't have any 
> business getting the struct.

I'll work on an RFC v2 including modifications discussed in this thread
(especially the ones raised about queues attributes; investigating if it
can be fixed). I might send the patches about the name checking helper
separately to reduce the size of the series, as I think they bring value
outside of it.

(In the meantime suggestions or reviews from others are still welcomed).

BTW, what are your thoughts on patch 1? It is not strictly linked to the
others (or to other solutions that might arise).

Thanks!
Antoine