netdev - Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] ethtool: fix clearing of WoL flags

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: <20231019152743.09b28ef4@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 15:27:43 +0200
From: Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Jakub
 Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Vladimir
 Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 1/1] ethtool: fix clearing of WoL flags

On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 12:50:48 +0200
Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 12:21:14PM +0200, Köry Maincent wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:51:40 +0200 > Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
> > wrote:  
> > > 
> > > The issue was indeed introduced by commit 108a36d07c01 ("ethtool: Fix
> > > mod state of verbose no_mask bitset"). The problem is that a "no mask"
> > > verbose bitset only contains bit attributes for bits to be set. This
> > > worked correctly before this commit because we were always updating
> > > a zero bitmap (since commit 6699170376ab ("ethtool: fix application of
> > > verbose no_mask bitset"), that is) so that the rest was left zero
> > > naturally. But now the 1->0 change (old_val is true, bit not present in
> > > netlink nest) no longer works.  
> > 
> > Doh I had not seen this issue! Thanks you for reporting it.
> > I will send the revert then and will update the fix for next merge-window.  
> 
> Something like the diff below (against current mainline) might do the
> trick but it's just an idea, not even build tested.

Seems a good idea without adding too much complexity to the code.
Will try that and send it in next merge window.

Köry