netdev - Re: Basic PCP/DEI-based queue classification

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: <20220824175453.0bc82031@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:54:53 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
Cc:     <Daniel.Machon@...rochip.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>, <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, <Allan.Nielsen@...rochip.com>,
        <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>, <roopa@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: Basic PCP/DEI-based queue classification

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 21:36:54 +0200 Petr Machata wrote:
> > So far only subtle changes. Now how do you see trust going in. Can you
> > elaborate a little on the policy selector you mentioned?  
> 
> Sure. In my mind the policy is a array that describes the order in which
> APP rules are applied. "default" is implicitly last.
> 
> So "trust DSCP" has a policy of just [DSCP]. "Trust PCP" of [PCP].
> "Trust DSCP, then PCP" of [DSCP, PCP]. "Trust port" (i.e. just default)
> is simply []. Etc.
> 
> Individual drivers validate whether their device can implement the
> policy.
> 
> I expect most devices to really just support the DSCP and PCP parts, but
> this is flexible in allowing more general configuration in devices that
> allow it.
> 
> ABI-wise it is tempting to reuse APP to assign priority to selectors in
> the same way that it currently assigns priority to field values:
> 
> # dcb app replace dev X sel-prio dscp:2 pcp:1
> 
> But that feels like a hack. It will probably be better to have a
> dedicated object for this:
> 
> # dcb app-policy set dev X sel-order dscp pcp
> 
> This can be sliced in different ways that we can bikeshed to death
> later. Does the above basically address your request?

For an uneducated maintainer like myself, how do embedded people look
at DCB? Only place I've seen it used is in RDMA clusers. I suggested 
to Vladimir to look at DCBNL for frame preemption because it's the only
existing API we have that's vaguely relevant to HW/prio control but he
ended up going with ethtool.
No preference here, just trying to map it out in my head.