netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: remove not needed net

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:   Sat, 3 Sep 2022 18:10:34 +0200
From:   Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
To:     Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: remove not needed net_ratelimit() check

On 03.09.2022 17:21, Francois Romieu wrote:
> Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com> :
>> We're not in a hot path and don't want to miss this message,
>> therefore remove the net_ratelimit() check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
> 
> There had historically been some user push against excess "spam"
> messages, even when systems are able to stand a gazillion of phy
> generated messages - resources constrained systems may not - due
> to dysfunctionning hardware or externally triggered events.
> 
> Things may have changed though.
> 
I don't have a strong opinion here and would follow the net
maintainers decision. I looked at a few other drivers and none of
them protects link up/down messages. If also other network-related
components print a message on link-up, then we might miss the
PHY message due to the network-global nature of net_ratelimit().
In general newer drivers don't seem to use net_ratelimit()
extensively, even though that's not really an argument against
using it.