netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: AF-specific RTM

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: <587959BB.4000000@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Jan 2017 14:50:35 -0800
From:   Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com>
CC:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>, ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: AF-specific RTM_GETSTATS attributes

On 1/13/17, 10:14 AM, Robert Shearman wrote:
> Add the functionality for including address-family-specific per-link
> stats in RTM_GETSTATS messages. This is done through adding a new
> IFLA_STATS_AF_SPEC attribute under which address family attributes are
> nested and then the AF-specific attributes can be further nested. This
> follows the model of IFLA_AF_SPEC on RTM_*LINK messages and it has the
> advantage of presenting an easily extended hierarchy. The rtnl_af_ops
> structure is extended to provide AFs with the opportunity to fill and
> provide the size of their stats attributes.
>
> One alternative would have been to provide AFs with the ability to add
> attributes directly into the RTM_GETSTATS message without a nested
> hierarchy. I discounted this approach as it increases the rate at
> which the 32 attribute number space is used up and it makes
> implementation a little more tricky for stats dump resuming (at the
> moment the order in which attributes are added to the message has to
> match the numeric order of the attributes).
>
> Another alternative would have been to register per-AF RTM_GETSTATS
> handlers. I discounted this approach as I perceived a common use-case
> to be getting all the stats for an interface and this approach would
> necessitate multiple requests/dumps to retrieve them all.
>
> Signed-off-by: Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com>
>
Acked-by: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>