netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2 03/12] flow_offload: check for basic action 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]

Date:   Sun, 1 Mar 2020 10:00:09 +0100
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, 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, pablo@...filter.org,
        ecree@...arflare.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 03/12] flow_offload: check for basic action
 hw stats type

Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 08:18:48PM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Feb 2020 08:40:04 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 08:40:56PM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>> >On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:24:56 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:  
>> >> @@ -299,6 +300,9 @@ static int bnxt_tc_parse_actions(struct bnxt *bp,
>> >>  		return -EINVAL;
>> >>  	}
>> >>  
>> >> +	if (!flow_action_basic_hw_stats_types_check(flow_action, extack))
>> >> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;  
>> >
>> >Could we have this helper take one stat type? To let drivers pass the
>> >stat type they support?   
>> 
>> That would be always "any" as "any" is supported by all drivers.
>> And that is exactly what the helper checks..
>
>I'd think most drivers implement some form of DELAYED today, 'cause for
>the number of flows things like OvS need that's the only practical one.
>I was thinking to let drivers pass DELAYED here.
>
>I agree that your patch would most likely pass ANY in almost all cases
>as you shouldn't be expected to know all the drivers, but at least the
>maintainers can easily just tweak the parameter.
>
>Does that make sense? Maybe I'm missing something.

Well, I guess. mlx5 only supports "delayed". It would work for it.
How about having flow_action_basic_hw_stats_types_check() as is and
add flow_action_basic_hw_stats_types_check_ext() that would accept extra
arg with enum?