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:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 12:23:05 +0200
From:   Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Max Staudt <max@...as.org>,
        Dario Binacchi <dario.binacchi@...rulasolutions.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jeroen Hofstee <jhofstee@...tronenergy.com>,
        michael@...rulasolutions.com,
        Amarula patchwork <linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] can: slcan: remove legacy infrastructure



On 7/18/22 12:15, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
> On 18.07.2022 08:57:21, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>> What do the maintainers think of dropping the old "slcan" name, and
>>> just allowing this to be a normal canX device? These patches do bring
>>> it closer to that, after all. In this case, this name string magic
>>> could be dropped altogether.
>>>
>>
>> I'm fine with it in general. But we have to take into account that there
>> might be existing setups that still might use the slcan_attach or slcand
>> mechanic which will likely break after the kernel update.
>>
>> But in the end the slcan0 shows up everywhere - even in log files, etc.
>>
>> So we really should name it canX. When people really get in trouble with it,
>> they can rename the network interface name with the 'ip' tool ...
> 
> Don't break user space! If you don't like slcanX use udev to give it a
> proper name.

Ok. Fine with me too.

IMO it does not break user space when slcan gets the common naming 
schema for CAN interface names.

We had the same thing with 'eth0' which is now named enblablabla or 
'wlan0' now named wlp2s0.

But I have no strong opinion on that naming ...

Best regards,
Oliver


Powered by blists - more mailing lists