netdev - Re: [patch net-next rfc 00/15] netdevsim: impement proper device model

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]

Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 14:00:05 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next rfc 00/15] netdevsim: impement proper device
 model

On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 07:25:01 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >Hm.. I'm getting lost, sorry, I'm probably confusing myself here..
> >
> >Netdevsim is supposed to test real, existing kernel interfaces and core
> >code.  What we do today with linking based on netdevs is quite simple
> >and works very well for the BPF offload tests.
> >
> >If you want to test some devlink code, that's also real, perfect.
> >
> >For BPF tests we want the ability to add and remove netdevs to a sdev
> >during tests, yes.  That ability cannot be lost.  
> 
> Yeah, but since the api is changing, the original approach of using
> IFLA_LINK cannot be used anymore. Not to mention is is abuse of the API
> from the very beginning. You want to add/del ports during lifetime, I'm
> trying to find interface. Basically whe have two options:
> 1) devlink extension I suggested above
> 2) sysfs files to add/del ports. Similar to "new_device" and
>    "del_device".
> 
> I like the idea of having 2) better, the reason is this is very speficic
> to netdevsim and not really applicable on real devices.

Sure, if custom sysfs API is any better than the use of IFLA_LINK in a
test mock up, go for it.

Creating a custom devlink ABI for a test mockup netdev seems like a bad
idea.