| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5492FAD4.7070308@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:03:32 -0800
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To: "Varlese, Marco" <marco.varlese@...el.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Fastabend, John R" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
"sfeldma@...il.com" <sfeldma@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/1] net: Support for switch port configuration
On 12/18/2014 07:30 AM, Varlese, Marco wrote:
> From: Marco Varlese <marco.varlese@...el.com>
>
> Switch hardware offers a list of attributes that are configurable on a per port
> basis.
> This patch provides a mechanism to configure switch ports by adding an NDO
> for setting specific values to specific attributes.
> There will be a separate patch that adds the "get" functionality via another
> NDO and another patch that extends iproute2 to call the two new NDOs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Varlese <marco.varlese@...el.com>
> ---
> include/linux/netdevice.h | 5 +++
> include/uapi/linux/if_link.h | 15 +++++++++
> net/core/rtnetlink.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index c31f74d..4881c7b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -1027,6 +1027,9 @@ typedef u16 (*select_queue_fallback_t)(struct net_device *dev,
> * int (*ndo_switch_port_stp_update)(struct net_device *dev, u8 state);
> * Called to notify switch device port of bridge port STP
> * state change.
> + * int (*ndo_switch_port_set_cfg)(struct net_device *dev,
> + * u32 attr, u64 value);
> + * Called to set specific switch ports attributes.
> */
> struct net_device_ops {
> int (*ndo_init)(struct net_device *dev);
> @@ -1185,6 +1188,8 @@ struct net_device_ops {
> struct netdev_phys_item_id *psid);
> int (*ndo_switch_port_stp_update)(struct net_device *dev,
> u8 state);
> + int (*ndo_switch_port_set_cfg)(struct net_device *dev,
> + u32 attr, u64 value);
> #endif
> };
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h b/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
> index f7d0d2d..6ad9b91 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_link.h
> @@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ enum {
> IFLA_PHYS_PORT_ID,
> IFLA_CARRIER_CHANGES,
> IFLA_PHYS_SWITCH_ID,
> + IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG,
> __IFLA_MAX
> };
>
> @@ -603,4 +604,18 @@ enum {
>
> #define IFLA_HSR_MAX (__IFLA_HSR_MAX - 1)
>
> +/* Switch Port Attributes section */
Could you also document the attributes. I think they are mostly
clear but what is IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK. It will help later when we
try to read the code in 6months and implement drivers.
I am thinking something like
/* Switch Port Attributes section
* IFLA_SW_LEARNING - turns learning on in the bridge
* IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK - does something interesting
[...]
*/
> +
> +enum {
> + IFLA_SW_UNSPEC,
> + IFLA_SW_LEARNING,
Can you address Roopa's feedback. I'm also a bit confused by the
duplication.
> + IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK,
> + IFLA_SW_BCAST_FLOODING,
> + IFLA_SW_UCAST_FLOODING,
> + IFLA_SW_MCAST_FLOODING,
> + __IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX
> +};
> +
> +#define IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX (__IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX - 1)
> +
> #endif /* _UAPI_LINUX_IF_LINK_H */
> diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> index eaa057f..d50ca71 100644
> --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> @@ -1223,6 +1223,7 @@ static const struct nla_policy ifla_policy[IFLA_MAX+1] = {
> [IFLA_PHYS_PORT_ID] = { .type = NLA_BINARY, .len = MAX_PHYS_ITEM_ID_LEN },
> [IFLA_CARRIER_CHANGES] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, /* ignored */
> [IFLA_PHYS_SWITCH_ID] = { .type = NLA_BINARY, .len = MAX_PHYS_ITEM_ID_LEN },
> + [IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG] = { .type = NLA_NESTED },
> };
>
> static const struct nla_policy ifla_info_policy[IFLA_INFO_MAX+1] = {
> @@ -1265,6 +1266,14 @@ static const struct nla_policy ifla_port_policy[IFLA_PORT_MAX+1] = {
> [IFLA_PORT_RESPONSE] = { .type = NLA_U16, },
> };
>
> +static const struct nla_policy ifla_sw_attr_policy[IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX+1] = {
> + [IFLA_SW_LEARNING] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> + [IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> + [IFLA_SW_BCAST_FLOODING] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> + [IFLA_SW_UCAST_FLOODING] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> + [IFLA_SW_MCAST_FLOODING] = { .type = NLA_U64 },
> +};
Why U64 values? What would we pass in these? Are these just boolean
bits? Maybe the annotation above will help me understand this.
> +
> static int rtnl_dump_ifinfo(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb)
> {
> struct net *net = sock_net(skb->sk);
> @@ -1389,6 +1398,41 @@ static int validate_linkmsg(struct net_device *dev, struct nlattr *tb[])
> return 0;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV
> +static int do_setswcfg(struct net_device *dev, struct nlattr *attr)
> +{
> + int rem, err = -EINVAL;
> + struct nlattr *v;
> + const struct net_device_ops *ops = dev->netdev_ops;
> +
style nit again since its an RFC after all... Its preferred to arrange
arguments like this as a loosly followed convention,
const struct net_device_ops *ops = dev->netdev_ops;
int rem, err = -EINVAL;
struct nlattr *v;
> + nla_for_each_nested(v, attr, rem) {
> + u32 op = nla_type(v);
> + u64 value = 0;
> +
> + switch (op) {
> + case IFLA_SW_LEARNING:
> + case IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK:
> + case IFLA_SW_BCAST_FLOODING:
> + case IFLA_SW_UCAST_FLOODING:
> + case IFLA_SW_MCAST_FLOODING: {
> + value = nla_get_u64(v);
should we validate the get_u64 'value'? Are there valid ranges or
something?
> + err = ops->ndo_switch_port_set_cfg(dev,
> + op,
> + value);
> + break;
> + }
> + default:
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (err)
> + break;
> + }
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +#endif
> +
> static int do_setvfinfo(struct net_device *dev, struct nlattr *attr)
> {
> int rem, err = -EINVAL;
> @@ -1740,6 +1784,35 @@ static int do_setlink(const struct sk_buff *skb,
> status |= DO_SETLINK_NOTIFY;
> }
> }
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_SWITCHDEV
> + if (tb[IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG]) {
> + struct nlattr *attrs[IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX+1];
> +
> + err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + if (!ops->ndo_switch_port_set_cfg)
> + goto errout;
> + if (!ops->ndo_switch_parent_id_get)
> + goto errout;
> +
style nit (take it for what its worth) but I would compress the above to
if (!ops->ndo_switch_port_set_cfg ||
!ops->ndo_switch_parent_id_get)
goto errout;
I'm also wondering if we really need to check for parent_id_get() here.
I'm not sure I see why a driver would implement port_set_cfg() and not
parent_id_get() though so its mostly harmless.
> + err = nla_parse_nested(attrs, IFLA_SW_ATTR_MAX,
> + tb[IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG],
> + ifla_sw_attr_policy);
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err;
hmm everywhere else you use goto errout but not here?
> +
> + err = do_setswcfg(dev, tb[IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG]);
> + if (err < 0)
> + goto errout;
> +
> + status |= DO_SETLINK_NOTIFY;
hmm another question if you modify the hardware from do_setswcfg()
for an attribute but then fail on a subsequent attribute shouldn't
we have DO_SETLINK_MODIFY set? Say IFLA_SW_LEARNING is set but then
the device fails on IFLA_SW_LOOPBACK.
> + }
> +#else
> + if (tb[IFLA_SWITCH_PORT_CFG]) {
> + err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto errout;
> + }
> +#endif
> +
> err = 0;
>
> errout:
>
--
John Fastabend Intel Corporation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists