netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/5] ice: configure FW logging

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: <a810ade6-b847-28fa-6225-5f551a561940@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:40:04 -0700
From: Paul M Stillwell Jr <paul.m.stillwell.jr@...el.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, <vaishnavi.tipireddy@...el.com>,
	<horms@...nel.org>, <leon@...nel.org>, Pucha Himasekhar Reddy
	<himasekharx.reddy.pucha@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/5] ice: configure FW logging

On 10/10/2023 7:01 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 16:26:15 -0700 Paul M Stillwell Jr wrote:
>> I'm probably missing something here, but I don't know if this will do
>> what I need or not. What I have is a user passing a module name and a
>> log level and I'm trying to match those strings and create integer
>> values from them so I can configure the FW log for that module. I'm not
>> seeing how the above gets me there...
>>
>> I was trying to not use strncmp and instead use the built in kernel
>> string matching functions so that's how I ended up with the code I have
> 
> You're supposed to do very simple and targeted matching here.
> The cmdline parsing makes the code harder to follow.

OK, so what if we changed the code to create a new debugfs file entry 
for each module and used the dentry for ther file to know what file is 
being written to. Then we would only need to parse the log level. Would 
that be acceptable?

My confusion is around what makes the cmdline parsing harder to follow. 
Obviously for me it's easy :) so I am trying to understand your point of 
view.