netdev - Re: Genetlink per cmd policies

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: <563a2334a42cc5f33089c2bff172d92e118575ea.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 21:03:08 +0200
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        dsahern@...nel.org, pablo@...filter.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Genetlink per cmd policies

On Wed, 2020-09-30 at 12:01 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 20:36:24 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-09-30 at 09:44 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > 
> > > I started with a get_policy() callback, but I didn't like it much.
> > > Static data is much more pleasant for a client of the API IMHO.  
> > 
> > Yeah, true.
> > 
> > > What do you think about "ops light"? Insufficiently flexible?  
> > 
> > TBH, I'm not really sure how you'd do it?
> 
> There are very few users who actually access ops, I was thinking that
> callers to genl_get_cmd() should declare a full struct genl_ops on the
> stack (or in some context, not sure yet), and then genl_get_cmd() will
> fill it in.
> 
> If family has full ops it will do a memcpy(); if the ops are "light" it
> can assign the right pointers.
> 
> Plus it can propagate the policy and maxattr from family if needed in
> both cases.

Oh, so you were thinking you'd have to sort of decide on the *family*
level whether you want "light" or "heavy" ops?

Hm. I guess you could even have both?

	struct genl_ops *ops;
	struct genl_ops_ext *extops;

and then search both arrays, no need for memcpy/pointer assignment?

johannes