netdev - Re: [PATCH ethtool-next v1 1/1] ethtool: add support for ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_SRC and ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z0gsnc_t_G2YN_Gy@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 09:41:01 +0100
From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Cc: kernel@...gutronix.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool-next v1 1/1] ethtool: add support for
 ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_SRC and ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT_SRC

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 08:29:30PM +0100, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 02:10:54PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > diff --git a/netlink/desc-ethtool.c b/netlink/desc-ethtool.c
> > index 5c0e1c6f433d..97a994961c8e 100644
> > --- a/netlink/desc-ethtool.c
> > +++ b/netlink/desc-ethtool.c
> > @@ -252,12 +252,14 @@ static const struct pretty_nla_desc __cable_test_result_desc[] = {
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_INVALID(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT_UNSPEC),
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_U8(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT_PAIR),
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_U8(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT_CODE),
> > +	NLATTR_DESC_U8(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_RESULT_SRC),
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct pretty_nla_desc __cable_test_flength_desc[] = {
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_INVALID(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_UNSPEC),
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_U8(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_PAIR),
> >  	NLATTR_DESC_U32(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_CM),
> > +	NLATTR_DESC_U8(ETHTOOL_A_CABLE_FAULT_LENGTH_SRC),
> >  };
> >  
> >  static const struct pretty_nla_desc __cable_nest_desc[] = {
> 
> AFAICS both new attributes are U32 so that NLATTR_DESC_U32() should be
> used here. Looks good to me otherwise.
> 
> One question: the kernel counterpart seems to be present in 6.12 final,
> is there something that would prevent including this in ethtool 6.12
> (planned to be wrapped up at the end of this week)?

Ah, sorry. I overseen this mail. I do not see anything against it. I'll
resend new version today. 

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |