netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next RFC] Add NDOs for hardware timestamp get/set

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]

Message-ID: <20230401193048.f4j3h6mbe7ti2zo6@skbuf>
Date:   Sat, 1 Apr 2023 22:30:48 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Max Georgiev <glipus@...il.com>, kory.maincent@...tlin.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC] Add NDOs for hardware timestamp get/set

On Sat, Apr 01, 2023 at 12:24:50PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 22:12:15 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > My understanding of Jakub's objection is that the scope of the
> > NETDEV_ETH_IOCTL is too wide, and as such, it would need to change to
> > something like NETDEV_HWTSTAMP_SET. I can make that change if that is
> > the only objection, and resubmit that as preparation work for the
> > ndo_hwtstamp_set() effort.
> 
> My objection to the IOCTL is that there's a lot of boilerplate that 
> the drivers have to copy and that it makes it harder to do meaningful
> work in the core.

By "NETDEV_ETH_IOCTL" I mean a netdev notifier with this name, and so,
I was expecting objections to that...

I can change that notifier proposal to be scoped only to the hwtstamping
operation, and that notifier would be 100% orthogonal to which API is
used to get/set hwtstamping, ndo_eth_ioctl() or ndo_hwtstamp_set().