Oliver Neukum <oneukum@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I am wondering about the MAC address usbnet is handing > out. In particular why that is a singular address. This has been the case since long long before I ever looked at usbnet.c. The variable declaration is in fact still attributed to the initial git commit: ^1da177e4c3f4 drivers/usb/net/usbnet.c (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 64) // randomly generated ethernet address ^1da177e4c3f4 drivers/usb/net/usbnet.c (Linus Torvalds 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 65) static u8 node_id [ETH_ALEN]; Pretty impressive given the churn we've had since then :) If I were to guess why it ended up like that, I'd say that it probably was because it was considered an exceptional fallback only. If you wrote a driver with the USB-IF communication class spec in mind, then it was reasonable to expect a functional decriptor pointing to a string descriptor with a globally unique mac address, assigned by the device manufacturer. A host using more than one usbnet device was also unlikely 20 years ago. So host unique was good enough in any case. These factors have change a lot since then, obviously. > Frankly that seems plainly wrong. A MAC is supposed > to be unique, which is just fundamentally incompatible > to using the same MAC for multiple devices, as usbnet > currently potentially does. Agreed. > Do you think that behavior should be changed to using > a separate random MAC for each device that requires it? I'm in favour. I could be wrong, but I don't expect anything to break if we did that. The current static address comes from eth_random_addr() in any case, so the end result as seen from the mini drivers should be identical. The difference will be seen in userspace and surrounding equipment, And those should be for the better. Bjørn
