linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next] devlink: Execute devlink health recover as a work

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]

Message-ID: <20190425193737.131be39f@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Apr 2019 19:37:37 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] devlink: Execute devlink health recover as a
 work

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 01:42:34 +0000, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > @@ -4813,7 +4831,11 @@ static int
> > > devlink_nl_cmd_health_reporter_recover_doit(struct sk_buff *skb,
> > >  	if (!reporter)
> > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > >  
> > > -	return devlink_health_reporter_recover(reporter, NULL);
> > > +	if (!reporter->ops->recover)
> > > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > > +
> > > +	queue_work(devlink->reporters_wq, &reporter->recover_work);
> > > +	return 0;
> > >  }  
> > 
> > So the recover user space request will no longer return the status,
> > and
> > it will not actually wait for the recover to happen.  Leaving user
> > pondering - did the recover run and fail, or did it nor get run
> > yet...
> >   
> 
> wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout is missing from the design ?

Perhaps, but I think its better to avoid the async execution of 
the recover all together.  Perhaps its better to refcount the 
reporters on the call to recover_doit?  Or some such.. :)