netdev - Re: [PATCH v17 01/20] net: Introduce direct data placement tcp offload

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZTuDOhYzp4FeCZaA@nanopsycho>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:30:34 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Aurelien Aptel <aaptel@...dia.com>
Cc: linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	sagi@...mberg.me, hch@....de, kbusch@...nel.org, axboe@...com,
	chaitanyak@...dia.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
	Boris Pismenny <borisp@...dia.com>, aurelien.aptel@...il.com,
	smalin@...dia.com, malin1024@...il.com, ogerlitz@...dia.com,
	yorayz@...dia.com, galshalom@...dia.com, mgurtovoy@...dia.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org,
	imagedong@...cent.com, ast@...nel.org, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 01/20] net: Introduce direct data placement tcp
 offload

Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:07:58AM CEST, aaptel@...dia.com wrote:
>Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> writes:
>>>@@ -2134,6 +2146,9 @@ struct net_device {
>>>       netdev_features_t       mpls_features;
>>>       netdev_features_t       gso_partial_features;
>>>
>>>+#ifdef CONFIG_ULP_DDP
>>>+      struct ulp_ddp_netdev_caps ulp_ddp_caps;
>>
>> Why can't you have this inside the driver? You have set_caps/get_stats
>> ops. Try to avoid netdev struct pollution.
>
>Ok, we will move ulp_ddp_caps to the driver and add a get_caps() operation.
>
>>>+struct netlink_ulp_ddp_stats {
>> There is nothing "netlink" about this. Just stats. Exposed over netlink,
>> yes, but that does not need the prefix.
>
>Ok, we will remove the netlink prefix.
>
>>>+enum {
>>>+      ULP_DDP_C_NVME_TCP_BIT,
>>>+      ULP_DDP_C_NVME_TCP_DDGST_RX_BIT,
>>>+
>>>+      /*
>>>+       * add capabilities above and keep in sync with
>>>+       * Documentation/netlink/specs/ulp_ddp.yaml
>>
>> Wait what? Why do you need this at all? Just use the uapi enum.
>
>The generated enum does not define a "count" (ULP_DDP_C_COUNT) which we
>need to know how big the bitfield should be. Maybe the code generator
>can be patched to add a #define with the number of values in the enum?

Yeah. One way or another, don't duplicate the uapi enums.