netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net: sched: support replay of filter offload when binding to block

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180626.232156.1747067075368462571.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jun 2018 23:21:56 +0900 (KST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com
Cc:     jiri@...nulli.us, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, jhs@...atatu.com,
        gerlitz.or@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net: sched: support replay of filter
 offload when binding to block

From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:30:03 -0700

> This series from John adds the ability to replay filter offload requests
> when new offload callback is being registered on a TC block.  This is most
> likely to take place for shared blocks today, when a block which already
> has rules is bound to another interface.  Prior to this patch set if any
> of the rules were offloaded the block bind would fail.
> 
> A new tcf_proto_op is added to generate a filter-specific offload request.
> The new 'offload' op is supporting extack from day 0, hence we need to
> propagate extack to .ndo_setup_tc TC_BLOCK_BIND/TC_BLOCK_UNBIND and
> through tcf_block_cb_register() to tcf_block_playback_offloads().
> 
> The immediate use of this patch set is to simplify life of drivers which
> require duplicating rules when sharing blocks.  Switch drivers (mlxsw)
> can bind ports to rule lists dynamically, NIC drivers generally don't
> have that ability and need the rules to be duplicated for each ingress
> they match on.  In code terms this means that switch drivers don't
> register multiple callbacks for each port.  NIC drivers do, and get a
> separate request and hance rule per-port, as if the block was not shared.
> The registration fails today, however, if some rules were already present.
> 
> As John notes in description of patch 7, drivers which register multiple
> callbacks to shared blocks will likely need to flush the rules on block
> unbind.  This set makes the core not only replay the the offload add
> requests but also offload remove requests when callback is unregistered.
> 
> v2:
>  - name parameters in patch 2;
>  - use unsigned int instead of u32 for in_hw_coun;
>  - improve extack message in patch 7.

Series applied, thank you.