netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: dsa: add Arrow SpeedChips XRS700x driver

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: <20201128000234.hwd5zo2d4giiikjc@skbuf>
Date:   Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:02:34 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND..." <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] net: dsa: add Arrow SpeedChips XRS700x
 driver

On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 01:39:16AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 12:30:48AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > If there is a better alternative I'm all ears but having /proc and
> > > ifconfig return zeros for error counts while ip link doesn't will lead
> > > to too much confusion IMO. While delayed update of stats is a fact of
> > > life for _years_ now (hence it was backed into the ethtool -C API).
> >
> > How about dev_seq_start() issues a netdev notifier chain event, asking
> > devices which care to update their cached rtnl_link_stats64 counters.
> > They can decide if their cache is too old, and do a blocking read for
> > new values.
> >
> > Once the notifier has completed, dev_seq_start() can then
> > rcu_read_lock() and do the actual collection of stats from the drivers
> > non-blocking.
>
> That sounds smart. I can try to prototype that and see how well it
> works, or do you want to?

The situation is like this:

static int call_netdevice_notifiers_info(unsigned long val,
					 struct netdev_notifier_info *info);

expects a non-NULL info->dev argument.

To get a net device you need to call:

#define for_each_netdev(net, d)		\
		list_for_each_entry(d, &(net)->dev_base_head, dev_list)

which has the following protection rules:

/*
 * The @dev_base_head list is protected by @dev_base_lock and the rtnl
 * semaphore.
 *
 * Pure readers hold dev_base_lock for reading, or rcu_read_lock()
 *
 * Writers must hold the rtnl semaphore while they loop through the
 * dev_base_head list, and hold dev_base_lock for writing when they do the
 * actual updates.  This allows pure readers to access the list even
 * while a writer is preparing to update it.
 *
 * To put it another way, dev_base_lock is held for writing only to
 * protect against pure readers; the rtnl semaphore provides the
 * protection against other writers.
 *
 * See, for example usages, register_netdevice() and
 * unregister_netdevice(), which must be called with the rtnl
 * semaphore held.
 */

This means, as far as I understand, 2 things:
1. call_netdevice_notifiers_info doesn't help, since our problem is the
   same
2. I think that holding the RTNL should also be a valid way to iterate
   through the net devices in the current netns, and doing just that
   could be the simplest way out. It certainly worked when I tried it.
   But those could also be famous last words...