[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221208081955.335ca36c@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2022 08:19:55 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: "Kubalewski, Arkadiusz" <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
Vadim Fedorenko <vfedorenko@...ek.ru>,
Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Vadim Fedorenko <vadfed@...com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
"Olech, Milena" <milena.olech@...el.com>,
"Michalik, Michal" <michal.michalik@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 2/4] dpll: Add DPLL framework base functions
On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 09:14:32 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >Running DPLL control in a namespace / container.
> >
> >I mean - I generally think netns is overused, but yes, it's what
> >containers use, so I think someone may want to develop their
> >timer controller SW in as a container?
>
> The netdevices to control are already in the container. Isn't that
> enough?
For DPLL config we need to delegate the permission.
So we'd need a "is net admin in namespace X" check, no?
> >> Thinking about it a bit more, DPLL itself has no network notion. The
> >> special case is SyncE pin, which is linked to netdevice. Just a small
> >> part of dpll device. And the netdevice already has notion of netns.
> >> Isn't that enough?
> >
> >So we can't use devlink or netdev. Hm. So what do we do?
> >Make DPLLs only visible in init_net? And require init_net admin?
> >And when someone comes asking we add an explicit "move to netns"
> >command to DPLL?
>
> Well, as I wrote. The only part needed to be network namespaced are the
> netdev related pins. And netdevices have netns support. So my question
> again, why is that not enough?
For config which goes thru rtnl, yes, but we also need a caps check for:
+ DPLL_CMD_DEVICE_SET,
+ DPLL_CMD_PIN_SET,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists