netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2 01/12] flow_offload: Introduce offload of HW stats type

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: <20200229192947.oaclokcpn4fjbhzr@salvia>
Date:   Sat, 29 Feb 2020 20:29:47 +0100
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        saeedm@...lanox.com, leon@...nel.org, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
        vishal@...lsio.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
        idosch@...lanox.com, aelior@...vell.com, peppe.cavallaro@...com,
        alexandre.torgue@...com, jhs@...atatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, ecree@...arflare.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 01/12] flow_offload: Introduce offload of HW
 stats type

On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 06:24:54PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> 
> Initially, pass "ANY" (struct is zeroed) to the drivers as that is the
> current implicit value coming down to flow_offload. Add a bool
> indicating that entries have mixed HW stats type.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> - moved to actions
> - add mixed bool
> ---
>  include/net/flow_offload.h | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/net/flow_offload.h b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> index 4e864c34a1b0..eee1cbc5db3c 100644
> --- a/include/net/flow_offload.h
> +++ b/include/net/flow_offload.h
> @@ -154,6 +154,10 @@ enum flow_action_mangle_base {
>  	FLOW_ACT_MANGLE_HDR_TYPE_UDP,
>  };
>  
> +enum flow_action_hw_stats_type {
> +	FLOW_ACTION_HW_STATS_TYPE_ANY,
> +};
> +
>  typedef void (*action_destr)(void *priv);
>  
>  struct flow_action_cookie {
> @@ -168,6 +172,7 @@ void flow_action_cookie_destroy(struct flow_action_cookie *cookie);
>  
>  struct flow_action_entry {
>  	enum flow_action_id		id;
> +	enum flow_action_hw_stats_type	hw_stats_type;
>  	action_destr			destructor;
>  	void				*destructor_priv;
>  	union {
> @@ -228,6 +233,7 @@ struct flow_action_entry {
>  };
>  
>  struct flow_action {
> +	bool				mixed_hw_stats_types;

Why do you want to place this built-in into the struct flow_action as
a boolean?

You can express the same thing through a new FLOW_ACTION_COUNTER.
I know tc has implicit counters in actions, in that case tc can just
generate the counter right after the action.

Please, explain me why it would be a problem from the driver side to
provide a separated counter action.