netdev - Re: [patch net-next-2.6] net: introduce ethernet teaming device

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:	Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:39:28 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
To:	Benjamin Poirier <benjamin.poirier@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com,
	shemminger@...tta.com, fubar@...ibm.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
	tgraf@...radead.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, mirqus@...il.com,
	kaber@...sh.net, greearb@...delatech.com, jesse@...ira.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next-2.6] net: introduce ethernet teaming device

Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 07:26:24PM CEST, benjamin.poirier@...il.com wrote:
>Hi Jiri, just a few late comments:
>
>On 11/10/04 16:15, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> This patch introduces new network device called team. It supposes to be
>> very fast, simple, userspace-driven alternative to existing bonding
>> driver.
>> 
>> Userspace library called libteam with couple of demo apps is available
>> here:
>> https://github.com/jpirko/libteam
>> Note it's still in its dipers atm.
>> 
>> team<->libteam use generic netlink for communication. That and rtnl
>> suppose to be the only way to configure team device, no sysfs etc.
>> 
>> In near future python binding for libteam will be introduced. Also
>> daemon providing arpmon/miimon active-backup functionality will
>> be introduced. All what's necessary is already implemented in kernel team
>> driver.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
>
>[...]
>
>> +/******************************
>> + * Round-robin mode definition
>> + ******************************/
>> +
>> +static struct team_port *__get_first_port_up(struct team *team,
>> +					     struct team_port *port)
>
>This is more like __get_"next"_port_up() no?

Might be.

>
>> +{
>> +	struct team_port *cur;
>> +
>> +	if (port->linkup)
>> +		return port;
>> +	cur = port;
>> +	list_for_each_entry_continue_rcu(cur, &team->port_list, list)
>> +		if (cur->linkup)
>> +			return cur;
>> +	list_for_each_entry_rcu(cur, &team->port_list, list) {
>> +		if (cur == port)
>> +			break;
>> +		if (cur->linkup)
>> +			return cur;
>> +	}
>> +	return NULL;
>> +}
>> +
>
>[...]
>
>> +
>> +
>> +/****************
>> + * Mode handling
>> + ****************/
>> +
>> +static const struct team_mode *team_modes[] = {
>> +	&rr_mode,
>> +	&ab_mode,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const int team_mode_count = ARRAY_SIZE(team_modes);
>> +
>> +static int team_find_mode(const char *kind)
>> +{
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < team_mode_count; i++) {
>> +		const struct team_mode *mode = team_modes[i];
>> +
>> +		if (strcmp(mode->kind, kind) == 0)
>> +			return i;
>> +	}
>> +	return -ENOENT;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * We can benefit from the fact that it's ensured no port is present
>> + * at the time of mode change.
>> + */
>> +static void __team_change_mode(struct team *team, const int mode_index)
>> +{
>> +	const struct team_mode *mode = team_modes[mode_index];
>
>team_uninit() calls __team_change_mode(team, -1) which will therefore
>dereference team_modes[-1]. Is this always safe?

I changed this bits. New patch is coming soon...

Thanks.

Jirka

>
>-Ben
--
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