netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2 10/11] devlink: introduce dump selector attr and use it for per-instance dumps

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: <ZMipQcNtycg6Zyaq@nanopsycho>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 08:42:09 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	edumazet@...gle.com, moshe@...dia.com, saeedm@...dia.com,
	idosch@...dia.com, petrm@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 10/11] devlink: introduce dump selector attr
 and use it for per-instance dumps

Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 07:03:41PM CEST, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 14:47:08 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >Why not declare a fully nested policy with just the two attrs?  
>> 
>> Not sure I follow. But the nest under DEVLINK_ATTR_DUMP_SELECTOR has
>> its own policy, generated by devlink_nl_dump_selector_policy_init(). I
>> did it this way instead of separate policy array for 2 reasons:
>> 1) We don't have duplicate and possibly conflicting policies for devlink
>>    root and selector
>> 2) It is easy for specific object type to pass attrs that are included
>>    in the policy initialization (see the health reporter extension later
>>    in this patchset). There are couple of object to benefit from this,
>>    for example "sb".
>> 3) It is I think a bit nicer for specific object type to pass array of
>>    attrs, instead of a policy array that would be exported from netlink.c
>> 
>> If you insist on separate policy arrays, I can do it though.
>
>IMO the contents of the series do not justify the complexity.
>
>> I had it like that initially, I just decided to go this way for the 3 reasons
>> listed above.
>> 
>> >Also - do you know of any userspace which would pass garbage attrs 
>> >to the dumps? Do we really need to accept all attributes, or can
>> >we trim the dump policies to what's actually supported?  
>> 
>> That's what this patch is doing. It only accepts what the kernel
>> understands. It gives the object types (as for example health reporter)
>> option to extend the attr set to accept them into selectors as well, if
>> they know how to handle them.
>
>I'm talking about the "outer" policy, the level at which
>DEVLINK_ATTR_DUMP_SELECTOR is defined.

I don't follow :/ Could you please describe what exactly do you mean and
want to see? Thanks!