netdev - Re: [PATCH rdma-next v2 17/17] RDMA/nldev: Allow get default counter statistics through RDMA netlink

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: <20190522173011.GG15023@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 14:30:11 -0300
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
        RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Majd Dibbiny <majd@...lanox.com>,
        Mark Zhang <markz@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v2 17/17] RDMA/nldev: Allow get default counter
 statistics through RDMA netlink

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:34:53AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Mark Zhang <markz@...lanox.com>
> 
> This patch adds the ability to return the hwstats of per-port default
> counters (which can also be queried through sysfs nodes).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Zhang <markz@...lanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
>  drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> index 53c1d2d82a06..cb2dd38f49f1 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/nldev.c
> @@ -1709,6 +1709,98 @@ static int nldev_stat_del_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int nldev_res_get_default_counter_doit(struct sk_buff *skb,
> +					      struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
> +					      struct netlink_ext_ack *extack,
> +					      struct nlattr *tb[])
> +{
> +	struct rdma_hw_stats *stats;
> +	struct nlattr *table_attr;
> +	struct ib_device *device;
> +	int ret, num_cnts, i;
> +	struct sk_buff *msg;
> +	u32 index, port;
> +	u64 v;
> +
> +	if (!tb[RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_DEV_INDEX] || !tb[RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PORT_INDEX])
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	index = nla_get_u32(tb[RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_DEV_INDEX]);
> +	device = ib_device_get_by_index(sock_net(skb->sk), index);
> +	if (!device)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (!device->ops.alloc_hw_stats || !device->ops.get_hw_stats) {
> +		ret = -EINVAL;
> +		goto err;
> +	}
> +
> +	port = nla_get_u32(tb[RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PORT_INDEX]);
> +	if (!rdma_is_port_valid(device, port)) {
> +		ret = -EINVAL;
> +		goto err;
> +	}
> +
> +	msg = nlmsg_new(NLMSG_DEFAULT_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!msg) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto err;
> +	}
> +
> +	nlh = nlmsg_put(msg, NETLINK_CB(skb).portid, nlh->nlmsg_seq,
> +			RDMA_NL_GET_TYPE(RDMA_NL_NLDEV,
> +					 RDMA_NLDEV_CMD_STAT_GET),
> +			0, 0);
> +
> +	if (fill_nldev_handle(msg, device) ||
> +	    nla_put_u32(msg, RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_PORT_INDEX, port)) {
> +		ret = -EMSGSIZE;
> +		goto err_msg;
> +	}
> +
> +	stats = device->ops.alloc_hw_stats(device, port);
> +	if (!stats) {
> +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> +		goto err_msg;
> +	}

Why do we need yet another one of these to be allocated?

> +	num_cnts = device->ops.get_hw_stats(device, stats, port, 0);

Is '0' right here?

Jason