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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 05:02:13 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>, Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC v1 1/4] net: devlink: Add support for port regions On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:23:18AM +0000, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 02:45:39AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > This looks like a simple enough solution, but am I right that old > > kernels, which ignore this new DEVLINK_ATTR_PORT_INDEX netlink > > attribute, will consequently interpret any devlink command for a port as > > being for a global region? Sure, in the end, that kernel will probably > > fail anyway, due to the region name mismatch. And at the moment there > > isn't any driver that registers a global and a port region with the same > > name. But when that will happen, the user space tools of the future will > > trigger incorrect behavior into the kernel of today, instead of it > > reporting an unsupported operation as it should. Or am I > > misunderstanding? > > Thinking about this more, I believe that the only conditions that need > to be avoided are: > - mlx4 should never create a port region called "cr-space" or "fw-health" > - ice should never create a port region called "nvm-flash" or > "device-caps" > - netdevsim should never create a port region called "dummy" > - mv88e6xxx should never create a port region called "global1", > "global2" or "atu" > > Because these are the only region names supported by kernels that don't > parse DEVLINK_ATTR_PORT_INDEX, I think we don't need to complicate the > solution, and go with DEVLINK_ATTR_PORT_INDEX. It would be easy to check when adding a per port region if a global region of the same name already exists. Checking when adding a global region to see if there is a port region with the same name is a bit more work, but doable. Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists