netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/15] net/smc: Introduce SMCR get linkgroup command

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201113084557.4905813d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 2020 08:45:57 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, hca@...ux.ibm.com, raspl@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/15] net/smc: Introduce SMCR get linkgroup
 command

On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 16:08:39 +0100 Karsten Graul wrote:
> On 11/11/2020 23:34, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon,  9 Nov 2020 16:18:08 +0100 Karsten Graul wrote:  
> >> @@ -295,6 +377,14 @@ static int smc_diag_dump(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb)
> >>  
> >>  static int smc_diag_dump_ext(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb)
> >>  {
> >> +	struct smc_diag_req_v2 *req = nlmsg_data(cb->nlh);
> >> +
> >> +	if (req->cmd == SMC_DIAG_GET_LGR_INFO) {
> >> +		if ((req->cmd_ext & (1 << (SMC_DIAG_LGR_INFO_SMCR - 1))))
> >> +			smc_diag_fill_lgr_list(smc_diag_ops->get_lgr_list(),
> >> +					       skb, cb, req);
> >> +	}
> >> +
> >>  	return skb->len;
> >>  }  
> > 
> > IDK if this is appropriate for socket diag handler.
> > 
> > Is there precedent for funneling commands through socket diag instead
> > of just creating a genetlink family?
> 
> Thank you for your valuable comments. We are looking into a better way
> to retrieve the various information from the kernel into user space, 
> and we will come up with a v5 for that.

Thanks, but do double check that no other socket type is doing this, 
I'm far from a socket layer expert.