netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/6] devlink: Count struct devlink consumers

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: <YRzA3zCKCgAtprwc@unreal>
Date:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:12:15 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Guangbin Huang <huangguangbin2@...wei.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
        Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>,
        Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
        Yufeng Mo <moyufeng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/6] devlink: Count struct devlink consumers

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:32:17PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> > Sent: Monday, August 16, 2021 9:07 AM
> > To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
> > Cc: David S . Miller <davem@...emloft.net>; Guangbin Huang
> > <huangguangbin2@...wei.com>; Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>; Jiri
> > Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> > Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>; Shannon Nelson
> > <snelson@...sando.io>; Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>; Yufeng
> > Mo <moyufeng@...wei.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/6] devlink: Count struct devlink consumers
> > 
> > On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 18:53:45 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 08:47:41AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 12:57:28 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > The struct devlink itself is protected by internal lock and doesn't
> > > > > need global lock during operation. That global lock is used to protect
> > > > > addition/removal new devlink instances from the global list in use by
> > > > > all devlink consumers in the system.
> > > > >
> > > > > The future conversion of linked list to be xarray will allow us to
> > > > > actually delete that lock, but first we need to count all struct devlink
> > > > > users.
> > > >
> > > > Not a problem with this set but to state the obvious the global devlink
> > > > lock also protects from concurrent execution of all the ops which don't
> > > > take the instance lock (DEVLINK_NL_FLAG_NO_LOCK). You most likely know
> > > > this but I thought I'd comment on an off chance it helps.
> > >
> > > The end goal will be something like that:
> > > 1. Delete devlink lock
> > > 2. Rely on xa_lock() while grabbing devlink instance (past devlink_try_get)
> > > 3. Convert devlink->lock to be read/write lock to make sure that we can run
> > > get query in parallel.
> > > 4. Open devlink netlink to parallel ops, ".parallel_ops = true".
> > 
> > IIUC that'd mean setting eswitch mode would hold write lock on
> > the dl instance. What locks does e.g. registering a dl port take
> > then?
> 
> Also that I think we have some cases where we want to allow the driver to allocate new devlink objects in response to adding a port, but still want to block other global operations from running?

I don't see the flow where operations on devlink_A should block devlink_B.
Only in such flows we will need global lock like we have now - devlink->lock.
In all other flows, write lock of devlink instance will protect from
parallel execution.

Thanks