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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CACGkMEusb5NYi8ZTR-fovDku7n+As=HWitM+kx4CW10=oC87cQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 15:17:14 +0800 From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> Cc: dsahern@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, si-wei.liu@...cle.com, eperezma@...hat.com, lingshan.zhu@...el.com, elic@...dia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] vdpa: allow provisioning device features On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 7:01 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 03:58:21PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > This patch allows device features to be provisioned via vdpa. This > > will be useful for preserving migration compatibility between source > > and destination: > > > > # vdpa dev add name dev1 mgmtdev pci/0000:02:00.0 device_features 0x300020000 > > # dev1: mac 52:54:00:12:34:56 link up link_announce false mtu 65535 > > negotiated_features CTRL_VQ VERSION_1 ACCESS_PLATFORM > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> > > --- > > man/man8/vdpa-dev.8 | 10 ++++++++++ > > vdpa/include/uapi/linux/vdpa.h | 1 + > > vdpa/vdpa.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/man/man8/vdpa-dev.8 b/man/man8/vdpa-dev.8 > > index 9faf3838..bb45b4a6 100644 > > --- a/man/man8/vdpa-dev.8 > > +++ b/man/man8/vdpa-dev.8 > > @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ vdpa-dev \- vdpa device configuration > > .I NAME > > .B mgmtdev > > .I MGMTDEV > > +.RI "[ device_features " DEVICE_FEATURES " ]" > > .RI "[ mac " MACADDR " ]" > > .RI "[ mtu " MTU " ]" > > .RI "[ max_vqp " MAX_VQ_PAIRS " ]" > > @@ -74,6 +75,10 @@ Name of the new vdpa device to add. > > Name of the management device to use for device addition. > > > > .PP > > +.BI device_features " DEVICE_FEAETURES" > > typo Will fix. > > > +- specifies the device features that is provisioned for the new vdpa device. > > I propose > the device features -> the virtio "device features" bit-mask > > features sounds like it's a generic thing, here's it's > the actual binary > > and maybe add "the bits can be found under include/uapi/linux/virtio*h, > see macros such as VIRTIO_F_ and VIRTIO_NET_F_ for specific bit values" That's fine. > > > +This is optional. > > + > > and if not given what are the features? As in the past, determined by the parent/mgmt device, do we need to document this? > > > .BI mac " MACADDR" > > - specifies the mac address for the new vdpa device. > > This is applicable only for the network type of vdpa device. This is optional. > > @@ -127,6 +132,11 @@ vdpa dev add name foo mgmtdev vdpa_sim_net > > Add the vdpa device named foo on the management device vdpa_sim_net. > > .RE > > .PP > > +vdpa dev add name foo mgmtdev vdpa_sim_net device_features 0x300020000 > > +.RS 4 > > +Add the vdpa device named foo on the management device vdpa_sim_net with device_features of 0x300020000 > > +.RE > > +.PP > > vdpa dev add name foo mgmtdev vdpa_sim_net mac 00:11:22:33:44:55 > > .RS 4 > > Add the vdpa device named foo on the management device vdpa_sim_net with mac address of 00:11:22:33:44:55. > > diff --git a/vdpa/include/uapi/linux/vdpa.h b/vdpa/include/uapi/linux/vdpa.h > > index 94e4dad1..7c961991 100644 > > --- a/vdpa/include/uapi/linux/vdpa.h > > +++ b/vdpa/include/uapi/linux/vdpa.h > > @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ enum vdpa_attr { > > VDPA_ATTR_DEV_QUEUE_INDEX, /* u32 */ > > VDPA_ATTR_DEV_VENDOR_ATTR_NAME, /* string */ > > VDPA_ATTR_DEV_VENDOR_ATTR_VALUE, /* u64 */ > > + VDPA_ATTR_DEV_FEATURES, /* u64 */ > > > > /* new attributes must be added above here */ > > VDPA_ATTR_MAX, > > diff --git a/vdpa/vdpa.c b/vdpa/vdpa.c > > index b73e40b4..9a866d61 100644 > > --- a/vdpa/vdpa.c > > +++ b/vdpa/vdpa.c > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ > > #define VDPA_OPT_VDEV_MTU BIT(5) > > #define VDPA_OPT_MAX_VQP BIT(6) > > #define VDPA_OPT_QUEUE_INDEX BIT(7) > > +#define VDPA_OPT_VDEV_FEATURES BIT(8) > > > > struct vdpa_opts { > > uint64_t present; /* flags of present items */ > > @@ -38,6 +39,7 @@ struct vdpa_opts { > > uint16_t mtu; > > uint16_t max_vqp; > > uint32_t queue_idx; > > + __u64 device_features; > > }; > > > > struct vdpa { > > why __u and not uint here? That's possible, will do. > > > @@ -187,6 +189,17 @@ static int vdpa_argv_u32(struct vdpa *vdpa, int argc, char **argv, > > return get_u32(result, *argv, 10); > > } > > > > +static int vdpa_argv_u64_hex(struct vdpa *vdpa, int argc, char **argv, > > + __u64 *result) > > +{ > > + if (argc <= 0 || !*argv) { > > + fprintf(stderr, "number expected\n"); > > + return -EINVAL; > > + } > > + > > + return get_u64(result, *argv, 16); > > +} > > + > > struct vdpa_args_metadata { > > uint64_t o_flag; > > const char *err_msg; > > @@ -244,6 +257,10 @@ static void vdpa_opts_put(struct nlmsghdr *nlh, struct vdpa *vdpa) > > mnl_attr_put_u16(nlh, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_NET_CFG_MAX_VQP, opts->max_vqp); > > if (opts->present & VDPA_OPT_QUEUE_INDEX) > > mnl_attr_put_u32(nlh, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_QUEUE_INDEX, opts->queue_idx); > > + if (opts->present & VDPA_OPT_VDEV_FEATURES) { > > + mnl_attr_put_u64(nlh, VDPA_ATTR_DEV_FEATURES, > > + opts->device_features); > > + } > > } > > > > static int vdpa_argv_parse(struct vdpa *vdpa, int argc, char **argv, > > @@ -329,6 +346,14 @@ static int vdpa_argv_parse(struct vdpa *vdpa, int argc, char **argv, > > > > NEXT_ARG_FWD(); > > o_found |= VDPA_OPT_QUEUE_INDEX; > > + } else if (!strcmp(*argv, "device_features") && > > + (o_optional & VDPA_OPT_VDEV_FEATURES)) { > > + NEXT_ARG_FWD(); > > + err = vdpa_argv_u64_hex(vdpa, argc, argv, > > + &opts->device_features); > > + if (err) > > + return err; > > + o_found |= VDPA_OPT_VDEV_FEATURES; > > } else { > > fprintf(stderr, "Unknown option \"%s\"\n", *argv); > > return -EINVAL; > > > should not we validate the value we get? e.g. a mac feature > requires that mac is supplied, etc. This isn't an "issue" that is introduced by this patch. Management device is free to give _F_MAC even if the mac address is not provisioned by the userspace. So this should be the responsibility of the parent not the netlink/vdpa tool. > in fact hex isn't very user friendly. why not pass feature > names instead? This can be added on top if necessary. In fact there's a plan to accept JSON files for provisioning. The advantages of hex is we don't need to keep the name synced with the new features. Thanks > > > > > @@ -708,7 +733,7 @@ static int cmd_dev_add(struct vdpa *vdpa, int argc, char **argv) > > err = vdpa_argv_parse_put(nlh, vdpa, argc, argv, > > VDPA_OPT_VDEV_MGMTDEV_HANDLE | VDPA_OPT_VDEV_NAME, > > VDPA_OPT_VDEV_MAC | VDPA_OPT_VDEV_MTU | > > - VDPA_OPT_MAX_VQP); > > + VDPA_OPT_MAX_VQP | VDPA_OPT_VDEV_FEATURES); > > if (err) > > return err; > > > > -- > > 2.25.1 >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists