netdev - Re: [PATCH ethtool-next v2] features: add --json support

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]

Date:   Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:58:52 +0200
From:   Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys.f@...labora.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool-next v2] features: add --json support

On Mon, 2022-01-24 at 11:02 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:06:35 +0200 Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote:
> > +                       if (is_json_context()) {
> > +                               print_bool(PRINT_JSON,
> > off_flag_def[i].long_name, NULL, flag_value);
> > +                       } else {
> 
> Would it make sense to report "fixed" and "requested" as nil for the
> special features? I'm not a high level language expert but otherwise
> generic code handling features will have to test for presence of
> those
> keys before accessing them, no?
I thought about this question for a while, some people prefer to check
for key existence, some prefer to have key, but set null value, and
even all my friends were divided in opinion. 
I think you are right, for a stable schema, I'd better add null values
for missing attributes. I will prepare v3.