netdev - Re: [patch net-next v7 08/13] net: sched: add rt netlink message type for block get

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: <20180111111147.GD2053@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:   Thu, 11 Jan 2018 12:11:47 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, jhs@...atatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        michael.chan@...adcom.com, ganeshgr@...lsio.com,
        saeedm@...lanox.com, matanb@...lanox.com, leonro@...lanox.com,
        idosch@...lanox.com, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com, pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com,
        john.hurley@...ronome.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
        ogerlitz@...lanox.com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
        daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v7 08/13] net: sched: add rt netlink message
 type for block get

Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 10:37:10AM CET, jiri@...nulli.us wrote:
>Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 05:48:09PM CET, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>>On 1/9/18 7:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> index 9c026d9..038cde7 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>> @@ -150,6 +150,12 @@ enum {
>>>  	RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT = 96,
>>>  #define RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT RTM_NEWCACHEREPORT
>>>  
>>> +	RTM_NEWBLOCK = 100,
>>> +#define RTM_NEWBLOCK RTM_NEWBLOCK
>>> +	RTM_DELBLOCK,
>>> +#define RTM_DELBLOCK RTM_DELBLOCK
>>> +	RTM_GETBLOCK,
>>> +#define RTM_GETBLOCK RTM_GETBLOCK
>>>  	__RTM_MAX,
>>>  #define RTM_MAX		(((__RTM_MAX + 3) & ~3) - 1)
>>>  };
>>
>>Seems like this is creating an inconsistency. RTM_GETBLOCK is used to
>>dump the set of shared blocks, but RTM_NEWBLOCK / RTM_DELBLOCK are not
>>used to create / delete one.
>
>Why is it a problem? RTM_NEWBLOCK is used as a reply for RTM_GETBLOCK.
>I plan to have block notifications as a follow-up, there the RTM_GETBLOCK

I mean RTM_NEWBLOCK and RTM_DELBLOCK of couse.

>and RTM_DELBLOCK will be used. The fact the user cannot create and
>delete block explicitly is no problem in my opinion. The block creation
>and deletion is done according to usage of qdiscs.