netdev - Re: [patch net-next v8 08/14] 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: <20180115172702.GE2103@nanopsycho>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jan 2018 18:27:02 +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 v8 08/14] net: sched: add rt netlink message
 type for block get

Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 06:21:44PM CET, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>On 1/15/18 10:08 AM, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 1/15/18 10:03 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 05:56:31PM CET, dsahern@...il.com wrote:
>>>> On 1/12/18 8:46 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add simple block get operation which primary purpose is to check the
>>>>> block existence by block index.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v6->v7:
>>>>> - new patch
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h |  6 ++++
>>>>>  net/sched/cls_api.c            | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>  security/selinux/nlmsgtab.c    |  5 +++-
>>>>>  3 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h b/include/uapi/linux/rtnetlink.h
>>>>> index da878f2..4b1f626 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)
>>>>>  };
>>>>> diff --git a/net/sched/cls_api.c b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>>>> index d687e58..14e4f20 100644
>>>>> --- a/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>>>> +++ b/net/sched/cls_api.c
>>>>> @@ -1553,6 +1553,69 @@ int tc_setup_cb_call(struct tcf_block *block, struct tcf_exts *exts,
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(tc_setup_cb_call);
>>>>>  
>>>>> +static int block_notify_fill(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>>>> +			     struct tcf_block *block, u32 portid, u32 seq,
>>>>> +			     u16 flags, int event)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	struct nlmsghdr *nlh;
>>>>> +	struct tcmsg *tcm;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	nlh = nlmsg_put(skb, portid, seq, event, sizeof(*tcm), flags);
>>>>> +	if (!nlh)
>>>>> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
>>>>> +	tcm = nlmsg_data(nlh);
>>>>> +	memset(tcm, 0, sizeof(*tcm));
>>>>> +	tcm->tcm_family = AF_UNSPEC;
>>>>> +	tcm->tcm_ifindex = TCM_IFINDEX_MAGIC_BLOCK;
>>>>> +	tcm->tcm_block_index = block->index;
>>>>> +	return 0;
>>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>> Why can't this be done with RTM_GETQDISC?
>>>
>>> I don't follow. Could you please describe a bit more what do you think?
>> 
>> Why are you adding RTM_{NEW,GET,DEL}BLOCK? Can't you get the same
>> information using RTM_GETQDISC and updating it to check for the
>> 'tcm_ifindex == TCM_IFINDEX_MAGIC_BLOCK' path

I might, but it bould be an ugly hack. I would use cmd that is used to
manipulate qdisc to some entirely different purpose. That does not make
any sense to me :(



>> 
>
>The above question is because a user specifies a shared block in a
>'qdisc add'.

Qdisc and block is a different entity


>
>Alternatively, what about RTM_GETTFILTER? You already update
>tc_ctl_tfilter to check for TCM_IFINDEX_MAGIC_BLOCK

The object is still filter! Only the handle is different. You cannot
compare that, sorry.


>
>My main question is why can't existing RTM_ commands be used?