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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZTt2o294RMW+MwKs@nanopsycho> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:36:51 +0200 From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3] tools: ynl: introduce option to process unknown attributes or types Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:30:58PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:25:14 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 04:41:20PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote: >> >On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:42:33 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote: >> >> {'129': {'0': [type:0 len:12] b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00', >> >> '1': [type:1 len:12] b'\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00', >> >> '2': [type:2 len:12] b'(\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00\x00'}, >> >> Looks like unnecessary redundant info, I would rather stick with >> >> "as_bin()". __repr__() is printable representation of the whole object, >> >> we just need value here, already have that in a structured object. >> >> >> >> >> >> What is "type" and "len" good for here? >> > >> >I already gave you a longer explanation, if you don't like the >> >duplication, how about you stop keying them on a (stringified?!) id. >> >> I don't care that much, it just looks weird :) > >As I said my key requirement is that the NlAttr object must still >be there in the result. Yeah, that I don't how to do honestly. See below. > >Maybe a good compromise is to stick it into the key, instead of the >value. Replacing the stringified type id. Then you can keep the >value as binary. Okay, that sounds good. But "key": \bvalue is not something to be printed out by __repr__() as it outs string. Therefore I don't understand how this compiles with your key requirement above. I have to be missing something, pardon my ignorance. >We'd need to wrap it into another class but whatever, >compromises. Will check on how to implement this. > >IDK how this works in Python exactly but to give you a rough idea >here's pseudo code typed in the email client: > >class UnknownNlAttrKey: > def __init__(self, nlattr): > self.nla = nlattr > def __hash__(self): > return self.nla.type > def __eq__(self, other): > if isintance(other, Unknown...): > return other.nla.type == self.nla.type > return False > def __repr__(): > return f"UnknownAttr({self.nla.type})" I see, will check if this is needed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists