From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] netlink: add 'bitmap' attribute type and API
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2022 11:53:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220725115324.7a1ad2d6@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220725130255.3943438-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:02:55 +0200 Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > Actually once a field crosses the biggest natural int size I was
> > thinking that the user would go to a bitmap.
> >
> > So at the netlink level the field is bigint (LE, don't care about BE).
> > Kernel side API is:
> >
> > nla_get_b8, nla_get_b16, nla_get_b32, nla_get_b64,
> > nla_get_bitmap
> > nla_put_b8, nla_put_b16 etc.
> >
> > u16 my_flags_are_so_toight;
> >
> > my_flags_are_so_toight = nla_get_b16(attr[BLAA_BLA_BLA_FLAGS]);
> >
> > The point is - the representation can be more compact than u64 and will
> > therefore encourage anyone who doesn't have a strong reason to use
> > fixed size fields to switch to the bigint.
>
> Ahh looks like I got it! So you mean that at Netlink level we should
> exchange with bigint/u64arrs, but there should be an option to
> get/set only 16/32/64 bits from them to simplify (or keep simple)
> users?
Not exactly. I'd prefer if the netlink level was in u32 increments.
u64 requires padding (so the nla_put..() calls will have more args).
Netlink requires platform alignment and rounds up to 4B, so u32 is much
more convenient than u64. Similarly - it doesn't make sense to represent
sizes smaller than 4B because of the rounding up, so nla_put_b8() can
be a define to nla_put_b32(). Ethool's choice of u32 is not without
merit.
> Like, if we have `u16 uuid`, to not do
>
> unsigned long uuid_bitmap;
>
> nla_get_bitmap(attr[FLAGS], &uuid_bitmap, BITS_PER_TYPE(u16));
> uuid = (u16)uuid_bitmap;
>
> but instead
>
> uuid = nla_get_b16(attr[FLAGS]);
>
> ?
Yes.
> > about being flexible when it comes to size, I guess, more than
> > bitmap in particular.
>
> Probably, but you also said above that for anything bigger than
> longs you'd go for bitmaps, didn't you? So I guess that series
> goes in the right direction, just needs a couple more inlines
> to be able to get/put u{32, 64; 8, 16 -- not sure about these two
> after reading your follow-up mail} as easy as nla_{get,put}<size>()
> and probably dropping Endianness stuff? Hope I got it right ._.
Modulo the fact that I do still want to pack to u32. Especially a
single u32 - perhaps once we cross 8B we can switch to requiring 8B
increments.
The nla_len is 16bit, which means that attrs nested inside other attrs
are quite tight for space (see the sad story of VF attrs in
RTM_GETLINK). If we don't represent u8/u16/u32 in a netlink-level
efficient manner we're back to people arguing for raw u32s rather than
using the new type.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-25 18:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-21 15:59 [PATCH net-next 0/4] netlink: add 'bitmap' attribute type and API Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-21 15:59 ` [PATCH net-next 1/4] bitmap: add converting from/to 64-bit arrays of explicit byteorder Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-21 15:59 ` [PATCH net-next 2/4] bitmap: add a couple more helpers to work with arrays of u64s Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-21 15:59 ` [PATCH net-next 3/4] lib/test_bitmap: cover explicitly byteordered arr64s Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-21 15:59 ` [PATCH net-next 4/4] netlink: add 'bitmap' attribute type (%NL_ATTR_TYPE_BITMAP / %NLA_BITMAP) Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-21 18:13 ` [PATCH net-next 0/4] netlink: add 'bitmap' attribute type and API Jakub Kicinski
2022-07-22 14:55 ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-22 18:19 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-07-23 15:52 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-07-25 13:02 ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-25 18:53 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-07-26 10:41 ` Alexander Lobakin
2022-07-26 17:17 ` Jakub Kicinski
[not found] ` <CAHp75Ve7oXjNyc0GD5x9ZW=DVgCqmLOBfCP4O2cDi2DG=4SiwQ@mail.gmail.com>
2022-07-25 10:24 ` Alexander Lobakin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220725115324.7a1ad2d6@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=alexandr.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).