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: <willemdebruijn.kernel.53e77e2eea78@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 21:16:57 -0500
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
 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

Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> 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.. :)

Not at all. Thanks for that uAPI context.