netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] taprio: Add support for txtime-assist mode.

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: <0ED5E88B-E95A-4899-975D-00912685CEEF@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 Jun 2019 22:27:07 +0000
From:   "Patel, Vedang" <vedang.patel@...el.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        "Gomes, Vinicius" <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
        "l@...ileo.org" <l@...ileo.org>,
        Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] taprio: Add support for txtime-assist
 mode.

Hi Jacub, 

> On Jun 7, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 20:42:55 +0000, Patel, Vedang wrote:
>>> Thanks for the changes, since you now validate no unknown flags are
>>> passed, perhaps there is no need to check if flags are == ~0?
>>> 
>>> IS_ENABLED() could just do: (flags) & TCA_TAPRIO_ATTR_FLAG_TXTIME_ASSIST
>>> No?
>>> 
>> This is specifically done so that user does not have to specify the
>> offload flags when trying to install the another schedule which will
>> be switched to at a later point of time (i.e. the admin schedule
>> introduced in Vinicius’ last series). Setting taprio_flags to ~0
>> will help us distinguish between the flags parameter not specified
>> and flags set to 0.
> 
> I'm not super clear on this, because of backward compat you have to
> treat attr not present as unset.  Let's see:
> 
> new qdisc:
> - flags attr = 0 -> txtime not used
> - flags attr = 1 -> txtime used
> -> no flags attr -> txtime not used
> change qdisc:
> - flags attr = old flags attr -> leave unchanged
> - flags attr != old flags attr -> error
> - no flags attr -> leave txtime unchanged
> 
> Doesn't that cover the cases?  Were you planning to have no flag attr
> on change mean disabled rather than no change?

You covered all the cases above.

Thinking a bit more about it, yes you are right. Initiializing flags to 0 will work.  I will incorporate this change in the next version.

Thanks,
Vedang