netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] Bonding: add per port priority support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 13:04:46 -0400
From:   Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com>
To:     Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:     Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] Bonding: add per port priority support

On 4/12/22 11:55, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>>>    diff --git a/include/net/bonding.h b/include/net/bonding.h
>>> index b14f4c0b4e9e..4ff093fb2289 100644
>>> --- a/include/net/bonding.h
>>> +++ b/include/net/bonding.h
>>> @@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ struct slave {
>>>    	u32    speed;
>>>    	u16    queue_id;
>>>    	u8     perm_hwaddr[MAX_ADDR_LEN];
>>> +	int    prio;
>> Do we want a struct slave_params here instead? That would allow us to
>> define defaults in a central place and set them once instead of setting
>> each parameter.
> 	Presuming that you mean creating a sub-struct here and moving
> some set of members of struct slave into it, I'm not sure I see the
> benefit, as it would only exist here and not really be an independent
> object.  Am I misunderstanding?

You are understanding correctly. The goal of this work is to eventually 
port the majority of the per-port parameters that exist in teaming to 
bonding, we have not determined the entire set that make sense. Thus 
there will be more than just port priority as a userspace configurable 
option. So I was attempting to ask if modeling the initial setting of 
these parameters like how `bonding_defaults` is used, made sense.

file: drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:
	void bond_setup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
	{
		struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);

		spin_lock_init(&bond->mode_lock);
		bond->params = bonding_defaults;
	...


We can always refactor this area when there is another option that needs 
setting.

-Jon