netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] phy: open_alliance_helpers: Add defines for link quality metrics

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ac794205-ec9a-4e92-aa74-7c0f9ee67823@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 22:45:32 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] phy: open_alliance_helpers: Add defines
 for link quality metrics

On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 01:34:28PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 06:50:46 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > Considering that you've requested a change to the uAPI, the work has now become
> > more predictable. I can plan for it within the task and update the required
> > time budget accordingly. However, it's worth noting that while this work is
> > manageable, the time spent on this particular task could be seen as somewhat
> > wasted from a budget perspective, as it wasn't part of the original scope.
> 
> I can probably take a stab at the kernel side, since I know the code
> already shouldn't take me more more than an hour. Would that help?
> You'd still need to retest, fix bugs. And go thru review.. so all
> the not-so-fun parts
> 
> > > Especially that we're talking about uAPI, once we go down
> > > the string path I presume they will stick around forever.  
> > 
> > Yes, I agree with it. I just needed this feedback as early as possible.
> 
> Andrew? Do you want to decide? :)

I agree about avoiding free test strings. Something more structures
would be good.

I can definitely help out with review, but i don't have any time at
the moment for writing code.

	Andrew