netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v11 3/4] net sched actions: dump more than TCA_ACT_MAX

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: <7057a692-7233-4632-4f66-2f57c98322ea@mojatatu.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jul 2017 07:22:44 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, dsahern@...il.com,
        eric.dumazet@...il.com, mrv@...atatu.com,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com, alex.aring@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v11 3/4] net sched actions: dump more than
 TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO actions per batch

On 17-07-24 07:27 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 03:35:45AM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>> From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
[..]
> 
> This helper should be part of the previous patch.
> 

Will do next update.
> 

 >> @@ -1157,8 +1164,18 @@ static int tc_dump_action(struct sk_buff 
*skb, struct netlink_callback *cb)
 >> 	struct tc_action_ops *a_o;
 >> 	int ret = 0;
 >> 	struct tcamsg *t = (struct tcamsg *) nlmsg_data(cb->nlh);
 >> -	struct nlattr *kind = find_dump_kind(cb->nlh);
 >> +	struct nla_bitfield_32 fb;
 >> +	struct nlattr *count_attr = NULL;
 >> +	struct nlattr *tb[TCA_ROOT_MAX + 1];
 >> +	struct nlattr *kind = NULL;
 >
 > Reverse christmas tree :D
 >

There were already 2 christmas trees in place;->
I will re-arrange this.

>>
>> +	if (tb[TCA_ROOT_FLAGS])
>> +		fb = nla_get_bitfield_32(tb[TCA_ROOT_FLAGS]);
> 
> fb? bf? nbf? Please make this synced within the patchset.
> 
>

Ok, what do you like best? ;->

> Don't you need to mask value with selector? In fact, I think that
> nla_get_bitfield_32 could just return u32 which would be (value&selector).
> The validation takes care of unsupported bits.

For my use case I dont need any of the above since I dont need to
unset things. In other use cases you will need both selector and
value in case someone wants a bit to be set to 0.
Infact I think i will rename that helper to "nla_get_bitvalue_32"
to be more precise.

cheers,
jamal