netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] flow_offload: Re-add per-action statistics

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]

Date:   Sat, 18 May 2019 16:30:09 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Vishal Kulkarni <vishal@...lsio.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] flow_offload: Re-add per-action
 statistics

On 2019-05-15 3:39 p.m., Edward Cree wrote:
[..]
> 
> A point for discussion: would it be better if, instead of the tcfa_index
>   (for which the driver has to know the rules about which flow_action
>   types share a namespace), we had some kind of globally unique cookie?
>   In the same way that rule->cookie is really a pointer, could we use the
>   address of the TC-internal data structure representing the action?

tcfa_index + action identifier seem to be sufficiently global, no?
Then we dont have a mismatch with what the kernel(non-offloaded)
semantics.

Note: The kernel is free to generate the index (if the user doesnt
specify).

>  Do
>   rules that share an action all point to the same struct tc_action in
>   their tcf_exts, for instance?

Yes they do.

cheers,
jamal