netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] switchdev: implement IPv4 fib ndo wrappers

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]

Date:	Fri, 6 Mar 2015 12:53:44 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
Cc:	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	"alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com" <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] switchdev: implement IPv4 fib ndo
 wrappers

Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 10:38:43AM CET, sfeldma@...il.com wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 06:21:17AM CET, sfeldma@...il.com wrote:
>>>From: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
>>>
>>>Flesh out ndo wrappers to call into device driver.  To call into device driver,
>>>the wrapper must interate over route's nexthops to ensure all nexthop devs
>>>belong to the same switch device.  Currently, there is no support for route's
>>>nexthops spanning offloaded and non-offloaded devices, or spanning ports of
>>>multiple offload devices.
>>>
>>>Since switch device ports may be stacked under virtual interfaces (bonds and/or
>>>bridges), and the route's nexthop may be on the virtual interface, the wrapper
>>>will traverse the nexthop dev down to the base dev.  It's the base dev that's
>>>passed to the switchdev driver's ndo ops.
>>>
>>>Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
>>>---
>>> net/switchdev/switchdev.c |   98 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>>diff --git a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
>>>index 81c4c02..99907d8 100644
>>>--- a/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
>>>+++ b/net/switchdev/switchdev.c
>>>@@ -227,6 +227,65 @@ int ndo_dflt_netdev_switch_port_bridge_dellink(struct net_device *dev,
>>> }
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(ndo_dflt_netdev_switch_port_bridge_dellink);
>>>
>>>+static struct net_device *netdev_switch_get_lowest_dev(struct net_device *dev)
>>>+{
>>>+      const struct net_device_ops *ops = dev->netdev_ops;
>>>+      struct net_device *lower_dev;
>>>+      struct net_device *port_dev;
>>>+      struct list_head *iter;
>>>+
>>>+      /* Recusively search down until we find a sw port dev.
>>>+       * (A sw port dev supports ndo_switch_parent_id_get).
>>>+       */
>>>+
>>>+      if (dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD &&
>>>+          ops->ndo_switch_parent_id_get)
>>>+              return dev;
>>>+
>>>+      netdev_for_each_lower_dev(dev, lower_dev, iter) {
>>>+              port_dev = netdev_switch_get_lowest_dev(lower_dev);
>>>+              if (port_dev)
>>>+                      return port_dev;
>>>+      }
>>
>>
>> I think we should proparate through stacked devices properly as we do in
>> case of netdev_switch_port_bridge_setlink and netdev_switch_port_bridge_dellink
>> (and also with roopa's new patchset in case of
>> netdev_switch_port_stp_update)
>
>I think it's actually ndo_switch_parent_id_get you want to Roopa-fy
>(new word, has a nice ring to it).  But yes, do-able.

No, I definitelly do not want to propagate ndo_switch_parent_id_get
call. It should be implemented for switch port devices only.

>
>> Other than this I like this patchset. Great work! Thanks.
>
>Thanks for the early reviews.
--
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