netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 04/18] bpf, xdp: constify some bpf

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: <ZxeguJL4xV84+I+/@boxer>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 14:55:20 +0200
From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
	<toke@...hat.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann
	<daniel@...earbox.net>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, "Andrii
 Nakryiko" <andrii@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, "Magnus
 Karlsson" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
	<nex.sw.ncis.osdt.itp.upstreaming@...el.com>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 04/18] bpf, xdp: constify some bpf_prog *
 function arguments

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 03:56:12PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 13:12:58 +0200
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 04:53:36PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> >> In lots of places, bpf_prog pointer is used only for tracing or other
> >> stuff that doesn't modify the structure itself. Same for net_device.
> >> Address at least some of them and add `const` attributes there. The
> >> object code didn't change, but that may prevent unwanted data
> >> modifications and also allow more helpers to have const arguments.
> > 
> > I believe that this patch is not related to idpf XDP support at all. This
> > could be pulled out and send separately and reduce the amount of code
> > jungle that one has to go through in this set ;)
> 
> First of all, this series is called "core code changes".
> 
> Second is that without this patch I simply can't introduce libeth_xdp in
> its current form, as in some functions I pass const pointers, but here
> they won't be const -> compile-time error.

Ok, but that is just related to your vision of libeth. From my POV it
would be more convenient to send such patches earlier which would reduce
the size of set. I suppose this patch has been rotting on your branch for
a while and you could just publish it earlier and keep on working on
libeth in the meantime.

> 
> Thanks,
> Olek