netdev - Re: [patch net-next RFC v2 4/6] net: introduce switchdev API

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:26:26 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, nhorman@...driver.com,
	andy@...yhouse.net, dborkman@...hat.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
	jesse@...ira.com, pshelar@...ira.com, azhou@...ira.com,
	ben@...adent.org.uk, stephen@...workplumber.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com,
	f.fainelli@...il.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
	linville@...driver.com, dev@...nvswitch.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC v2 4/6] net: introduce switchdev API

Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:23:39PM CET, tgraf@...g.ch wrote:
>On 03/26/14 at 05:31pm, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> switchdev API is designed to allow kernel support for various switch
>> chips.
>> 
>> It is the responsibility of a driver to create netdevice instances which
>> represents every port and for the switch master itself. Driver uses
>> swdev_register and swportdev_register functions to make the core aware
>> of the fact these netdevices are representing switch and switch ports.
>
>I like this even more than the previous approach.
>
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>
>> +int __swdev_register(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	if (dev->priv_flags & IFF_SWITCH) {
>> +		netdev_err(dev, "Device is already registered as a switch device\n");
>> +		return -EBUSY;
>> +	}
>> +	dev->priv_flags |= IFF_SWITCH;
>> +	netdev_info(dev, "Switch device registered\n");
>
>Perhaps include name of device here?

netdev_info already does that.


>
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__swdev_register);
>> +
>> +int swdev_register(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	rtnl_lock();
>> +	err = __swdev_register(dev);
>> +	rtnl_unlock();
>> +	return err;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(swdev_register);
>> +
>> +void __swdev_unregister(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	dev->priv_flags |= IFF_SWITCH;
>> +	netdev_info(dev, "Switch device unregistered\n");
>
>Same here
>
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__swdev_unregister);
>> +
>> +void swdev_unregister(struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	rtnl_lock();
>> +	__swdev_unregister(dev);
>> +	rtnl_unlock();
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(swdev_unregister);
>> +
>> +
>> +bool swportdev_dev_check(const struct net_device *port_dev)
>> +{
>> +	return port_dev->priv_flags & IFF_SWITCH_PORT;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(swportdev_dev_check);
>> +
>> +static rx_handler_result_t swportdev_handle_frame(struct sk_buff **pskb)
>> +{
>> +	struct sk_buff *skb = *pskb;
>> +
>> +	/* We don't care what comes from port device into rx path.
>> +	 * If there's something there, it is destined to ETH_P_ALL
>> +	 * handlers. So just consume it.
>> +	 */
>> +	dev_kfree_skb(skb);
>> +	return RX_HANDLER_CONSUMED;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int __swportdev_register(struct net_device *port_dev, struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	if (!(dev->priv_flags & IFF_SWITCH)) {
>> +		netdev_err(dev, "Device is not a switch device\n");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +	if (port_dev->priv_flags & IFF_SWITCH_PORT) {
>> +		netdev_err(port_dev, "Device is already registered as a switch port\n");
>> +		return -EBUSY;
>> +	}
>> +	err = netdev_master_upper_dev_link(port_dev, dev);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		netdev_err(dev, "Device %s failed to set upper link\n",
>> +			   port_dev->name);
>> +		return err;
>> +	}
>> +	err = netdev_rx_handler_register(port_dev, swportdev_handle_frame, NULL);
>> +	if (err) {
>> +		netdev_err(dev, "Device %s failed to register rx_handler\n",
>> +			   port_dev->name);
>> +		goto err_handler_register;
>> +	}
>> +	port_dev->priv_flags |= IFF_SWITCH_PORT;
>> +	netdev_info(port_dev, "Switch port device registered\n");
>
>and here
>
>> +	return 0;
>> +
>> +err_handler_register:
>> +	netdev_upper_dev_unlink(port_dev, dev);
>> +	return err;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__swportdev_register);
>> +
>> +int swportdev_register(struct net_device *port_dev, struct net_device *dev)
>
>Maybe rename dev to switch_dev just to make it clear?


That might be reasonable.


>
>> +{
>> +	int err;
>> +
>> +	rtnl_lock();
>> +	err = __swportdev_register(port_dev, dev);
>> +	rtnl_unlock();
>> +	return err;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(swportdev_register);
>> +
>> +void __swportdev_unregister(struct net_device *port_dev)
>> +{
>> +	struct net_device *dev;
>> +
>> +	dev = netdev_master_upper_dev_get(port_dev);
>> +	BUG_ON(!dev);
>> +	port_dev->priv_flags &= ~IFF_SWITCH_PORT;
>> +	netdev_rx_handler_unregister(port_dev);
>> +	netdev_upper_dev_unlink(port_dev, dev);
>> +	netdev_info(port_dev, "Switch port device unregistered\n");
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__swportdev_unregister);
>> +
>> +void swportdev_unregister(struct net_device *port_dev)
>> +{
>> +	rtnl_lock();
>> +	__swportdev_unregister(port_dev);
>> +	rtnl_unlock();
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(swportdev_unregister);
>> +
>> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
>> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>");
>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Switch device API");
>> -- 
>> 1.8.5.3
>> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html