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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sat, 14 Feb 2015 10:36:13 -0800
From:	Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
	Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Maciej Zenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v3 2/6] bonding: implement bond_poll_controller()

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Jay Vosburgh
<jay.vosburgh@...onical.com> wrote:
>
> Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> >This patches implements the poll_controller support for all
> >bonding driver. If the slaves have poll_controller net_op defined,
> >this implementation calls them. This is mode agnostic implementation
> >and iterates through all slaves (based on mode) and calls respective
> >handler.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
> >---
> >v1:
> >   Initial version
> >v2:
> >   Eliminate bool variable.
> >v3:
> >   Rebase
> >
> > drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c  | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/net/bond_3ad.h          |  1 +
> > 3 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
> >index 9b436696b95e..14f2ebe786c5 100644
> >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
> >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
> >@@ -2477,6 +2477,30 @@ int bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info(struct bonding *bond, struct ad_info *ad_info)
> >       return ret;
> > }
> >
> >+#define BOND_3AD_PORT_OPERATIONAL \
> >+              (AD_STATE_DISTRIBUTING | AD_STATE_COLLECTING | \
> >+               AD_STATE_SYNCHRONIZATION | AD_STATE_AGGREGATION)
> >+
> >+static int bond_3ad_port_operational(struct slave *slave)
> >+{
> >+      port_t *port = &SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave)->port;
> >+
> >+      return bond_slave_can_tx(slave) &&
> >+             (port->actor_oper_port_state & port->partner_oper.port_state &
> >+              BOND_3AD_PORT_OPERATIONAL) == BOND_3AD_PORT_OPERATIONAL;
> >+}
> >+
> >+/* bond_3ad_port_is_active - check if a slave port is active or not. A port
> >+ * is active when it can forward traffic.
> >+ *
> >+ * @slave: slave port to check state for.
> >+ * Returns: 0 if not active else is active.
> >+ */
> >+int bond_3ad_port_is_active(struct slave *slave)
> >+{
> >+      return bond_3ad_port_operational(slave);
> >+}
> >+
>
>         Why the nesting here?  I don't see other users of
> bond_3ad_port_operational, so why not move that logic to
> bond_3ad_port_is_active and eliminate the extra level of function call?
>
>         Also, the test in bond_3ad_port_operational will exclude the
> case that the active agg port is Individual (e.g., link partner is not
> LACP-capable) as that case won't run the state machine to coll-dist
> state, but the agg is still available for TX/RX.
>
I missed this comment in the earlier reply. I wasn't sure if the
situation you described even works and hence I completely ignored that
case. Are you suggesting that this check can be eliminated and
replaced with just slave_can_tx() check? If not then what should be
the correct check?

Thanks,
--mahesh..

>         -J
>
>
> > int bond_3ad_lacpdu_recv(const struct sk_buff *skb, struct bonding *bond,
> >                        struct slave *slave)
> > {
> >diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >index b979c265fc51..8433fe464f95 100644
> >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >@@ -928,6 +928,39 @@ static inline void slave_disable_netpoll(struct slave *slave)
> >
> > static void bond_poll_controller(struct net_device *bond_dev)
> > {
> >+      struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
> >+      struct slave *slave = NULL;
> >+      struct list_head *iter;
> >+      struct ad_info ad_info;
> >+      struct netpoll_info *ni;
> >+      const struct net_device_ops *ops;
> >+
> >+      if (BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_8023AD)
> >+              if (bond_3ad_get_active_agg_info(bond, &ad_info))
> >+                      return;
> >+
> >+      bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, iter) {
> >+              ops = slave->dev->netdev_ops;
> >+              if (!bond_slave_is_up(slave) || !ops->ndo_poll_controller)
> >+                      continue;
> >+
> >+              if (BOND_MODE(bond) == BOND_MODE_8023AD) {
> >+                      struct aggregator *agg =
> >+                          SLAVE_AD_INFO(slave)->port.aggregator;
> >+
> >+                      if (agg && agg->aggregator_identifier !=
> >+                                 ad_info.aggregator_id)
> >+                              continue;
> >+                  if (!bond_3ad_port_is_active(slave) || ad_info.ports != 1)
> >+                              continue;
>
>         The above will exclude slaves that are in an aggregator with
> more than one member, which is likely to be the usual case.  Is that
> intentional?
>
>         Also, if this will only accept slaves from the active
> aggregator, and we're limiting it to case that the active agg has
> exactly one slave, why do we need to loop through all slaves of the
> bond?  Could we do something (inside an "if (mode == 8023AD)" block)
> like:
>
>         first_slave = bond_first_slave_rcu(bond);
>         [...]
>         agg = __get_active_agg(&(SLAVE_AD_INFO(first_slave)->aggregator));
>         if (agg->num_of_ports != 1)
>                 return;
>         slave = agg->lag_ports->slave;
>         if (!bond_3ad_port_is_active(slave)
>                 return;
>         [...]
>         ops->ndo_poll_controller(slave->dev);
>
>         That would need some checks, but, basically, go from the active
> aggregator directly to its list of slaves.
>
>         -J
>
> >+              }
> >+
> >+              ni = rcu_dereference_bh(slave->dev->npinfo);
> >+              if (down_trylock(&ni->dev_lock))
> >+                      continue;
> >+              ops->ndo_poll_controller(slave->dev);
> >+              up(&ni->dev_lock);
> >+      }
> > }
> >
> > static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
> >diff --git a/include/net/bond_3ad.h b/include/net/bond_3ad.h
> >index f04cdbb7848e..6c455c646d61 100644
> >--- a/include/net/bond_3ad.h
> >+++ b/include/net/bond_3ad.h
> >@@ -278,5 +278,6 @@ int bond_3ad_lacpdu_recv(const struct sk_buff *skb, struct bonding *bond,
> >                        struct slave *slave);
> > int bond_3ad_set_carrier(struct bonding *bond);
> > void bond_3ad_update_lacp_rate(struct bonding *bond);
> >+int bond_3ad_port_is_active(struct slave *slave);
> > #endif /* _NET_BOND_3AD_H */
> >
> >--
> >2.2.0.rc0.207.ga3a616c
>
> ---
>         -Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ