netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/3] TC: Introduce qevents

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:   Tue, 02 Jun 2020 00:37:25 +0200
From:   Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/3] TC: Introduce qevents


Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:40 AM Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> The first command just says "early drop position should be processed by
>> block 10"
>>
>> The second command just adds a filter to the block 10.

> This is exactly why it looks odd to me, because it _reads_ like
> 'tc qdisc' creates the block to hold tc filters... I think tc filters should
> create whatever placeholder for themselves.

Look at clsact. It creates blocks in exactly the same way.

> I know in memory block (or chain or filters) are stored in qdisc, but
> it is still different to me who initiates the creation.

The block binding mechanics are not new. The patch just reuses them. If
you are unhappy about how this is currently done, I too would see merit
in creating a block explicitly, like with chains. But it has nothing to
do with this patchset, which would just naturally pick up whatever this
new mechanic is.