netdev - Re: [net-next 10/11] net/mlx5e: Implement queue mgmt ops and single channel swap

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: <20250123165553.66f9f839@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:55:53 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman
 <gal@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>, Dragos Tatulea
 <dtatulea@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 10/11] net/mlx5e: Implement queue mgmt ops and single
 channel swap

On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:39:05 -0800 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > What technical debt accrued ? I haven't seen any changes in queue API since
> > > bnxt and gve got merged, what changed since then ?
> > > 
> > > mlx5 doesn't require rtnl if this is because of the assert, I can remove
> > > it. I don't understand what this series is being deferred for, please
> > > elaborate, what do I need to do to get it accepted ?  
> > 
> > Remove the dependency on rtnl_lock _in the core kernel_.  
> 
> IIUC, we want queue API to move away from rtnl and use only (new) netdev
> lock. Otherwise, removing this dependency in the future might be
> complicated.

Correct. We only have one driver now which reportedly works (gve).
Let's pull queues under optional netdev_lock protection.
Then we can use queue mgmt op support as a carrot for drivers
to convert / test the netdev_lock protection... "compliance".

I added netdev_lock protection for NAPI before the merge window.
Queues are configured in much more ad-hoc fashion, so I think 
the best way to make queue changes netdev_lock safe would be to
wrap all driver ops which are currently under rtnl_lock with
netdev_lock.