netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 01/26] switchdev: introduce get/set attrs ops

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: <20150402181606.GF2613@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:	Thu, 2 Apr 2015 20:16:06 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
Cc:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	"Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
	"Arad, Ronen" <ronen.arad@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 01/26] switchdev: introduce get/set attrs ops

Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 07:52:28PM CEST, sfeldma@...il.com wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> +       int err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> +
>>> +       if (!(dev->features & NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD))
>>> +               return err;
>>
>> That check is currently going to prevent DSA from working, since we do
>> not yet advertise NETIF_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD (which should be fixed). In
>> general, though I am not sure this is entirely desirable to check that
>> here for multiple reasons:
>>
>> - stacked devices typically propagate lower devices dev->features, but
>> if they are purposely not doing it, this might start breaking
>> - is not that check, used as it is now, that unconditionally, end-up
>> being redundant with e.g: getting the switch device id to identify
>> this net_device as a switch port net_device?
>>
>> I kind of preferred when we had this moved into the
>> __swdev_attr_{get,set} caller, such we had finer control over whether
>> or not checking for these kinds of features makes sense for a
>> particular operation.
>
>I dropped it in my v1 patch set all together, but then it came back in
>v2.  I understand how it works, giving the user the ability to turn
>on/off offload support on a port at run-time, but I don't understand
>the application.  I agree with you that we already have finer-grained
>ability to know if a sub-feature is supported or not based on what the
>driver implements (like switch ID or STP state).  I don't know what
>this master switch is used for.  Why would the user turn off
>offloading on a port at run-time after the device has already been
>programmed with some offloading tasks?  What tells the device to stop
>those offloads now.  And then later, the user flips the switch to turn
>back on offloads on the port.   How do we restore the device?
>
>Roopa, can you help us understand how NETIF_F_HW_SWITCH_OFFLOAD is used?

Documentation patch required? 
--
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