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, 27 Sep 2022 14:32:25 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <>
Cc:     Vladimir Oltean <>,
        "" <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,
        Xiaoliang Yang <>,
        Rui Sousa <>,
        Claudiu Manoil <>,
        Alexandre Belloni <>,
        "" <>,
        Horatiu Vultur <>,
        Andrew Lunn <>,
        Vivien Didelot <>,
        Florian Fainelli <>,
        Michael Walle <>,
        Vinicius Costa Gomes <>,
        Maxim Kochetkov <>,
        Colin Foster <>,
        Richie Pearn <>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <>,
        Tony Nguyen <>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <>,
        Alexandre Torgue <>,
        Jose Abreu <>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <>,
        Cong Wang <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,
        Gerhard Engleder <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 01/12] net/sched: taprio: allow user input
 of per-tc max SDU

On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 21:23:19 +0000 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:27:10AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > I know, that's what I expected you'd say :(
> > You'd need a reverse parser which is a PITA to do unless you have
> > clearly specified bindings.  
> I think you're underestimating the problem, it's worse than PITA. My A
> still hurts and yet I couldn't find any way in which reverse parsing the
> bad netlink attribute is in any way practical in iproute2, other than
> doing it to prove a point that it's possible.

Yup, iproute2 does not have policy tables, so it's hard.

Once you have tables like this:

all linking up the types, it's fairly easy to reverse parse:

Admittedly I haven't added parsing of the bounds yet so it'd just say
"invalid argument .bla.something" not "argument out of range
.bla.something (is: X, range N-M)" but that's just typing.

> > I'd rather you kept the code as is than make precedent for adding both
> > string and machine readable. If we do that people will try to stay on
> > the safe side and always add both.
> >
> > The machine readable format is carries all the information you need.  
> Nope, the question "What range?" still isn't answered via the machine
> readable format. Just "What integer?".

Hm, doesn't NLMSGERR_ATTR_POLICY contain the bounds?

> > It's just the user space is not clever enough to read it which is,
> > well, solvable.  
> You should come work at NXP, we love people who keep a healthy dose of
> unnecessary complexity in things :)

Ha! :D

> Sometimes, "not clever enough" is just fine.

Yup, go ahead with just the strings. "We'll get there" for the machine
readable parsing, hopefully, once my YAML descriptions come...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists