netdev - Re: RFC: rtnetlink problems with Cisco enic and VFs

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20140422.205939.850933099313805079.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 22 Apr 2014 20:59:39 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dgibson@...hat.com
Cc:	ben@...adent.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org, benve@...co.com,
	ssujith@...co.com, govindarajulu90@...il.com, neepatel@...co.com,
	nistrive@...co.com
Subject: Re: RFC: rtnetlink problems with Cisco enic and VFs

From: David Gibson <dgibson@...hat.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 09:26:06 +1000

> On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 14:12:00 -0400 (EDT)
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
>> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:03:19 +0100
>> 
>> > On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 14:14 +1000, David Gibson wrote:
>> >> I believe I've found a problem with netlink handling which can be
>> >> triggered on Cisco enic devices with a large number (30-40) of virtual
>> >> functions.  I believe this is the cause of a real customer problem
>> >> we've seen.
>> >> 
>> >>  * When requesting a list of interfaces with RTM_GETLINK, enic devices
>> >>    (and currently, _only_ enic devices) report IFLA_VF_PORTS
>> >>    information 
>> >> 
>> >>  * IFLA_VF_PORTS information has at least 90 bytes ber virtual function
>> >> 
>> >>  * Unlike IFLA_VFINFO_LIST, the ports information is always reported,
>> >>    regardless of the setting of the IFLA_EXT_MASK parameter
>> > [...]
>> > 
>> > So I think you should make reporting of IFLA_VF_PORTS dependent on the
>> > same flag as IFLA_VFINFO_LIST.
>> 
>> I think that's what we'll have to do.
> 
> Ok, makes logical sense.
> 
> But does anyone know what tools make use of the IFLA_VF_PORTS
> information?  Do they set the IFLA_EXT_MASK already?

iproute2 makes use of IFLA_VF_PORTS and sets IFLA_EXT_MASK
unconditionally in rtnl_wilddump_request().

libvirt also makes use of IFLA_VF_PORTS, and also unconditionally
sets IFLA_EXT_MASK in virNetDevLinkDump.

I only did a quick search and can't find any more users.

--
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