netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v1 net-next 1/5] ethtool: Add support for configuring tx_push_buf

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:   Thu, 2 Mar 2023 09:10:03 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Shay Agroskin <shayagr@...zon.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.com>,
        "Machulsky, Zorik" <zorik@...zon.com>,
        "Matushevsky, Alexander" <matua@...zon.com>,
        Saeed Bshara <saeedb@...zon.com>,
        "Wilson, Matt" <msw@...zon.com>,
        "Liguori, Anthony" <aliguori@...zon.com>,
        "Bshara, Nafea" <nafea@...zon.com>,
        "Belgazal, Netanel" <netanel@...zon.com>,
        "Saidi, Ali" <alisaidi@...zon.com>,
        "Herrenschmidt, Benjamin" <benh@...zon.com>,
        "Kiyanovski, Arthur" <akiyano@...zon.com>,
        "Dagan, Noam" <ndagan@...zon.com>,
        "Arinzon, David" <darinzon@...zon.com>,
        "Itzko, Shahar" <itzko@...zon.com>,
        "Abboud, Osama" <osamaabb@...zon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 net-next 1/5] ethtool: Add support for
 configuring tx_push_buf_len

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 16:23:59 +0200 Shay Agroskin wrote:
> > Why gate both on kr->tx_push_buf_len and not current and max 
> > separately?
> > Is kr->tx_push_buf_len == 0 never a valid setting?
> 
> Hi, thanks for reviewing it
> 
> There's actually no requirement that tx_push_buf_len needs to be > 
> 0. I'll drop this check.
> It seems like the reply object gets zeroed at 
> ethnl_init_reply_data() so ENA can simply not touch this field if 
> no push buffer exists, leaving the values at 0.

Maybe gate them based on driver supported features?
Save the supported during prep so we don't need to find ops again,
and only report if needed. No point spamming outputs with 0 on all
devices.