netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 11/17] net/sched: taprio: centralize mqprio qopt validation

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: <Y903CuEDJInw/lN3@corigine.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2023 17:32:10 +0100
From:   Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
        Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 11/17] net/sched: taprio: centralize mqprio
 qopt validation

On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 02:36:15AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> There is a lot of code in taprio which is "borrowed" from mqprio.
> It makes sense to put a stop to the "borrowing" and start actually
> reusing code.
> 
> Because taprio and mqprio are built as part of different kernel modules,
> code reuse can only take place either by writing it as static inline
> (limiting), putting it in sch_generic.o (not generic enough), or
> creating a third auto-selectable kernel module which only holds library
> code. I opted for the third variant.
> 
> In a previous change, mqprio gained support for reverse TC:TXQ mappings,
> something which taprio still denies. Make taprio use the same validation
> logic so that it supports this configuration as well.
> 
> The taprio code didn't enforce TXQ overlaps in txtime-assist mode and
> that looks intentional, even if I've no idea why that might be. Preserve
> that, but add a comment.
> 
> There isn't any dedicated MAINTAINERS entry for mqprio, so nothing to
> update there.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>

Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>