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: <e4b5e4fa-45c4-4b67-b8f1-7d9ff9f8654f@linux.dev>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 10:29:32 -0400
From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...ux.dev>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Radhey Shyam Pandey <radhey.shyam.pandey@....com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Dave Ertman <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
 Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 1/4] auxiliary: Support hexadecimal ids

On 7/20/25 04:17, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 01:12:08PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> On 7/17/25 12:33, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 
> <...>
> 
>> Anyway, if you really think ids should be random or whatever, why not
>> just ida_alloc one in axiliary_device_init and ignore whatever's
>> provided? I'd say around half the auxiliary drivers just use 0 (or some
>> other constant), which is just as deterministic as using the device
>> address.
> 
> I would say that auxiliary bus is not right fit for such devices. This
> bus was introduced for more complex devices, like the one who has their
> own ida_alloc logic.

I'd say that around 2/3 of the auxiliary drivers that have non-constant
ids use ida_alloc solely for the auxiliary bus and for no other purpose.
I don't think that's the kind of complexity you're referring to.

>> Another third use ida_alloc (or xa_alloc) so all that could be
>> removed.
> 
> These ID numbers need to be per-device.

Why? They are arbitrary with no semantic meaning, right?

--Sean


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ