On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 02:38:39PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > In this case it is not ifconfig, but netstat -W iwm0.
> > Which is a debugging tool, like netstat -s.
>
> We don't care when netstat breaks
Alright, then this diff is indeed not necessary.
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:58:27PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Claudio Jeker wrote:
> >
> > > Honestly I think this is overkill. There is no stat struct where we do
> > > this dance. It is accepted that netstat needs to keep in sync for these
> > > structs to work.
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:58:27PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Claudio Jeker wrote:
>
> > Honestly I think this is overkill. There is no stat struct where we do
> > this dance. It is accepted that netstat needs to keep in sync for these
> > structs to work. Why is it necessary to disconnect
Claudio Jeker wrote:
> Honestly I think this is overkill. There is no stat struct where we do
> this dance. It is accepted that netstat needs to keep in sync for these
> structs to work. Why is it necessary to disconnect the kernel and userland
> for this?
Actually there is a major one: it is
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 07:17:33PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:55:48PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 03:04:06PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > For now, the structs are identical so the code copying data out is
> > > > kept simple.
> >
On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 03:55:48PM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 03:04:06PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > For now, the structs are identical so the code copying data out is
> > > kept simple.
> >
> > I think this is unwise, and you should write the field-by-field
On Mon, Mar 07, 2022 at 03:04:06PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > For now, the structs are identical so the code copying data out is
> > kept simple.
>
> I think this is unwise, and you should write the field-by-field copying
> function at the same time, otherwise this is just asking for
> For now, the structs are identical so the code copying data out is
> kept simple.
I think this is unwise, and you should write the field-by-field copying
function at the same time, otherwise this is just asking for trouble.
You really cannot wait until an intentional change.
There is another net80211 ioctl which shares a struct between kernel
and userland: struct ieee80211_stats shown by the netstat -W command.
While it is trivial to recompile netstat when this struct is changed,
giving the kernel a separate struct type would allow us to add, change,
or remove
