netdev - Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/2] Add ndo_set_vf_port

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: <C7FB3E22.2BAEE%scofeldm@cisco.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Apr 2010 12:57:06 -0700
From:	Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>
To:	Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <chrisw@...hat.com>, <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH 1/2] Add ndo_set_vf_port_profile

On 4/26/10 12:27 PM, "Scott Feldman" <scofeldm@...co.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/10 12:19 AM, "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> Also, I think it's reasonable to fetch the current profile in use, so
>> GETLINK ought to report these things.  To make it generic we can
>> maintain the settings given to us in software, hung off of the netdev
>> struct, and simply report that during GETLINK.
> 
> We'd need an array of struct ifla_vf_port_profile hanging off of netdev, one
> element for each VF.  That seems like a lot of mem hanging off of netdev,
> and we'd have to define a MAX_VF to size the array.  How about a
> ndo_get_vf_port_profile() that the netdev fills in, and the netdev keeps the
> data in it's private area?  That's how ndo_get_vf_config() is working.

Hmmm....even that isn't so nice because the port-profile info for all VFs is
going to get stuffed into the RTM_GETLINK skb, and I assume there are limits
on the skb return size.

Here's a proposal:

Currently we have RTM_GETLINK for

    ip link show [ DEVICE ]

This dumps everything for the DEVICE including info for each VF.  Let's
modify RTM_GETLINK to look like this:

    ip link show [ DEVICE [ vf NUM] ]

If you don't give the optional vf NUM you get base dump on DEVICE.  If you
give vf NUM, you get the VF-specific dump.  This scales much better with the
number of VFs.  

(Number of VFs can easily be > 128 in some designs).

Comments?

-scott

--
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