netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net 1/6] rtnetlink: Add bulk registration helpers for rtnetlink message handlers.

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: <CANn89iKEaY22wrYoi9NbZ3CN+fwXqmLnM_P+zgucv_Unna64UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 10:25:20 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuni1840@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net 1/6] rtnetlink: Add bulk registration helpers for
 rtnetlink message handlers.

On Sat, Oct 5, 2024 at 12:24 AM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com> wrote:
>
> Before commit addf9b90de22 ("net: rtnetlink: use rcu to free rtnl message
> handlers"), once rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol] was allocated, the following
> rtnl_register_module() for the same protocol never failed.
>
> However, after the commit, rtnl_msg_handler[protocol][msgtype] needs to
> be allocated in each rtnl_register_module(), so each call could fail.
>
> Many callers of rtnl_register_module() do not handle the returned error,
> and we need to add many error handlings.
>
> To handle that easily, let's add wrapper functions for bulk registration
> of rtnetlink message handlers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
> ---
>  include/net/rtnetlink.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  net/core/rtnetlink.c    | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 49 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/rtnetlink.h b/include/net/rtnetlink.h
> index b45d57b5968a..b6b91898dc13 100644
> --- a/include/net/rtnetlink.h
> +++ b/include/net/rtnetlink.h
> @@ -29,6 +29,14 @@ static inline enum rtnl_kinds rtnl_msgtype_kind(int msgtype)
>         return msgtype & RTNL_KIND_MASK;
>  }
>
> +struct rtnl_msg_handler {

Since we add a structure, we could stick here a

            struct module *owner;

> +       int protocol;
> +       int msgtype;
> +       rtnl_doit_func doit;
> +       rtnl_dumpit_func dumpit;
> +       int flags;
> +};
> +
>  void rtnl_register(int protocol, int msgtype,
>                    rtnl_doit_func, rtnl_dumpit_func, unsigned int flags);
>  int rtnl_register_module(struct module *owner, int protocol, int msgtype,
> @@ -36,6 +44,17 @@ int rtnl_register_module(struct module *owner, int protocol, int msgtype,
>  int rtnl_unregister(int protocol, int msgtype);
>  void rtnl_unregister_all(int protocol);
>
> +int __rtnl_register_many(struct module *owner,
> +                        struct rtnl_msg_handler *handlers, int n);
> +void __rtnl_unregister_many(struct rtnl_msg_handler *handlers, int n);
> +
> +#define rtnl_register_many(handlers)                                           \
> +       __rtnl_register_many(NULL, handlers, ARRAY_SIZE(handlers))
> +#define rtnl_register_module_many(handlers)                                    \
> +       __rtnl_register_many(THIS_MODULE, handlers, ARRAY_SIZE(handlers))


This would allow a simpler api, no need for rtnl_register_module_many()