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, 6 Mar 2023 11:32:25 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, hawk@...nel.org,
        toke@...hat.com, memxor@...il.com, alardam@...il.com,
        lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] ethtool: provide XDP information with
 XDP_FEATURES_GET

On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 19:32:02 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> So far the only way to dump the XDP features supported by the NIC is through
> libbpf running bpf_xdp_query(). I would say it is handy for a sysadmin to
> examine the XDP NIC capabilities in a similar way he/she is currently doing
> for the hw offload capabilities. Something like (I have an ethtool user-space
> patch not posted yet):

The sysadmin running linux-next or 6.3-rc1, that is? :)

The plan in my head is to package a tool like tools/net/ynl/cli.py for
sysadmins to use. Either package it with the specs or expose the specs
in sysfs like we expose BTF and kheaders.

I was hoping we can "give it a release or two" to get more experience
with the specs with just developers using them, 'cause once sysadmins
are using them we'll have to worry about backward compat.

But I don't want to hold you back so if the plan above sounds sensible
to you we can start executing on it, perhaps?

Alternative would be to teach ethtool or some other tool (new tool?)
to speak netdev genl, because duplicating the uAPI at the kernel level
really seems odd :(

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ