netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net_tstamp: add new flag HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_UNSTABLE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211209213053.GD21819@hoboy.vegasvil.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Dec 2021 13:30:53 -0800
From:   Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:     Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net_tstamp: add new flag
 HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_UNSTABLE_PHC

On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 01:22:58PM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 12:31:30PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 07:20:22AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > > I guess that the original intent of hwtstamp_config.flags was for user
> > > space to SET flags that it wanted. 
> > > Now this has become a place for drivers to return values back.
> > 
> > I think it's a flag that when uses want phc index of bond.
> > There is no affect for other drivers. It only affect bond interfaces.
> > When this flag set, it means users want to get the info from bond.
> > 
> > Do I missed something?
> 
> No, I simply mean that the input/output direction of the bit in the
> flags should be clear.
> 
> - User space will not set this bit, only read it.
> - Drivers may set this bit, but if user sets it, it is an error.

Oh, I am confused.  Your patch does this:

- if user sets bit, then return bonded index
- otherwise, return EOPNOTSUPP

That is fine with me.

Thanks,
Richard