netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] Control action percpu counters allocation by netlink flag

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, 26 Oct 2019 14:38:21 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Roman Mashak <mrv@...atatu.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "mleitner@...hat.com" <mleitner@...hat.com>,
        "dcaratti@...hat.com" <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] Control action percpu counters allocation
 by netlink flag

On 2019-10-26 12:42 p.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
> 
> On Sat 26 Oct 2019 at 19:06, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:

> Hmm, yes, this looks quite redundant.

It's legit.
Two different code paths for two different objects
that can be configured independently or together.
Only other thing that does this is FIB/NH path.

> At the same time having basically
> same flags in two different spaces is ugly. Maybe correct approach would
> be not to add act API at all and only extend tcf_action_init_1() to be
> used from cls API? I don't see a use for act API at the moment because
> the only flag value (skip percpu allocation) is hardware offloads
> specific and such clients generally create action through cls new filter
> API. WDYT?
> 

I am not sure if there is a gain. Your code path is
tcf_exts_validate()->tcf_action_init()->tcf_action_init_1()

Do you want to replicate the tcf_action_init() in
cls?

cheers,
jamal