netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] netdevsim: Add simple FIB resource controller via devlink

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: <20180406055255.GB19345@nanopsycho>
Date:   Fri, 6 Apr 2018 07:52:55 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, shm@...ulusnetworks.com,
        jiri@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
        jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, andy.roulin@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] netdevsim: Add simple FIB resource
 controller via devlink

Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 11:06:41PM CEST, dsa@...ulusnetworks.com wrote:
>On 4/5/18 2:10 PM, David Ahern wrote:
>> 
>> The ASIC here is the kernel tables in a namespace. It does not make
>> sense to have 2 devlink instances for a single namespace.
>
>I put this example controller in netdevsim per a suggestion from Ido.
>The netdevsim seemed like a good idea given that modules intention --
>testing network facilities. Perhaps I should have done this as a
>completely standalone module ...
>
>The intention is to treat the kernel's tables *per namespace* as a
>standalone entity that can be managed very similar to ASIC resources.

So you say you want to treat a namespace as an ASIC? That sounds very
odd to me :/


>Given that I can add a resource controller module
>(drivers/net/kern_res_mgr.c?) that creates a 'struct device' per network
>namespace with a devlink instance. In this case the device would very
>much be tied to the namespace 1:1.

That sounds more reasonable and accurate, yet still odd. You would not
have any netdevices there? Any ports?