netdev - Re: [next-queue v6 PATCH 7/7] i40e: Add support to get switch id and port number for port netdevs

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: <CAKgT0UcM9dtM5DPNpdobevfOfWA9aZQgg_jx6wAgkjM6umt5Ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Mar 2017 15:31:01 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        Anjali Singhai Jain <anjali.singhai@...el.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [next-queue v6 PATCH 7/7] i40e: Add support to get switch id and
 port number for port netdevs

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Jakub Kicinski
<jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 17:22:55 -0700, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
>> Introduce switchdev_ops to PF and port netdevs to return the switch id via
>> SWITCHDEV_ATTR_ID_PORT_PARENT_ID attribute.
>> Also, ndo_get_phys_port_name() support is added to port netdevs to return
>> the port number.
>>
> ...
>> +static int
>> +i40e_port_netdev_get_phys_port_name(struct net_device *dev, char *buf,
>> +                                 size_t len)
>> +{
>> +     struct i40e_port_netdev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
>> +     struct i40e_vf *vf;
>> +     int ret;
>> +
>> +     switch (priv->type) {
>> +     case I40E_PORT_NETDEV_VF:
>> +             vf = (struct i40e_vf *)priv->f;
>> +             ret = snprintf(buf, len, "%d", vf->vf_id);
>> +             break;
>> +     case I40E_PORT_NETDEV_PF:
>> +             ret = snprintf(buf, len, "%d", I40E_MAIN_VSI_PORT_ID);
>> +             break;
>> +     default:
>> +             return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     if (ret >= len)
>> +             return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> +
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>
> You are using only an integer here, which forces you to manually name
> the netdev in patch 2, and that is what phys_port_name is supposed to
> help avoid doing AFAIU.
>
> We have naming rules in Documentation/networking/switchdev.txt for
> switch ports suggested as pX for physical ports or pXsY for ports which
> are broken out/split.  Could we establish similar suggestion for vf and
> pf representors and document it? (note: we may need pf representors for
> multi-host devices.)
>
> IMHO naming representors pfr%d or vfr%d would make sense.  This way
> actual VF and PF netdevs could be called pf%d and vf%d, and
> udev/systemd will give all netdevs nice, meaningful names without any
> custom rules.
>
> Sorry for the bike shedding but I was hoping we could save some user
> pain by establishing those rules (more or less) upfront.

This is something we should probably discuss at netdev/netconf next
week. It seems like the convention has been to just use an integer and
I think we might want to look at doing something like you are
suggesting where if nothing else we come up with a way of identifying
that a VF versus something like a segmented port which is the only
thing currently defined in the documentation.

- Alex