netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ethtool: Fix set RXFH for drivers without RXFH fields support

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: <20250710063729.08ae71e6@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 06:37:29 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew@...n.ch>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Dragos Tatulea
 <dtatulea@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ethtool: Fix set RXFH for drivers without RXFH
 fields support

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 14:17:11 +0300 Gal Pressman wrote:
> > We could add a:
> > 
> > 	if (WARN_ON(ops->supported_input_xfrm && !ops->get_rxfh_fields))
> > 		return -EINVAL;
> > 
> > into ethtool_check_ops() and we'd be both safe and slightly faster.  
> 
> This is a step further.
> 
> There could be a driver that allows setting of input xfrm but not rxfh
> fields. Failing the netdevice registration is different than skipping
> ethtool_check_flow_types().
> 
> Maybe there are no such devices and we shouldn't care?

Note that we're talking about the get. It's still perfectly fine for
the hypothetical driver to not support _changing_ the fields, the fields
be hardwired. But we need to know what fields the device is using to
validate the xfrm is correct.