netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/8] net: dsa: Multi-queue awareness

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]

Date:   Fri, 1 Sep 2017 20:50:12 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     jiri@...nulli.us, jhs@...atatu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/8] net: dsa: Multi-queue awareness

On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:27:43AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 09/01/2017 10:55 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Hi Florian
> > 
> >>>> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
> > 
> > It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementation just
> > use something like netdev_master_upper_dev_get('sw0p0')? Or does
> 
> Last I brought this up with Jiri that we should link DSA network devices
> to their master network deviecs with netdev_upper_dev_link() he said
> this was not appropriate for DSA slave network devices, but I can't
> remember why, I would assume that any stacked device set up would do that.

There is some form a linking going, our device names show that:

9: lan5@...1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state DOWN mode DEFAULT group default qlen 1000
    link/ether da:87:2a:03:cf:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff

> In any case, we need to establish a mapping so we have to specify at
> least the target device's queue number. It is quite similar in premise
> to e.g: enslaving a network device to a bridge port:
> 
> ip link set dev eth0 master br0

But here br0 is absolutely required, we have to say which bridge the
slave port should be a member of.

But what good is eth0 in

tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16

As i said suggesting, you have to somehow verify that eth0 is the
conduit interface sw0p0 is using. Which makes the parameter pointless.
Determine it from the sw0p0 somehow.

	  Andrew