netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] selftests: hw-net: toeplitz: read indirection table from the device

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: <20251121173203.7bc1a3f4@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 17:32:03 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org,
 willemb@...gle.com, petrm@...dia.com, dw@...idwei.uk, shuah@...nel.org,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] selftests: hw-net: toeplitz: read
 indirection table from the device

On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 18:12:16 -0500 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > +	if (rsp->_count.indir > RSS_MAX_INDIR)
> > +		error(1, 0, "RSS indirection table too large (%u > %u)",
> > +		      rsp->_count.indir, RSS_MAX_INDIR);
> > +
> > +	/* If indir table not available we'll fallback to simple modulo math */
> > +	if (rsp->_count.indir) {
> > +		memcpy(rss_indir_tbl, rsp->indir,
> > +		       rsp->_count.indir * sizeof(rss_indir_tbl[0]));  
> 
> It can be assumed that rsp->indir elements are sizeof(rss_indir_tbl[0])?
> 
> Is there a way to have the test verify element size. I'm not that
> familiar with YNL.

I suspect the reaction may be because drivers often use a smaller type.
But at the uAPI level the indirection table has always been represented
as an array of u32 (I mean the ioctl). And in the core we also always
deal with u32s. The Netlink type is not allowed to change either 
(it's a "C array" not individual attributes so members must be known
size).

LMK if you want me to add an assert or rework this. We could technically
keep the rsp struct around and use it directly?

Not fully convinced it's worth a respin, but LMK.. :)