From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, jiri@resnulli.us, razor@blackwall.org,
nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com, gnault@redhat.com,
jacob.e.keller@intel.com, fw@strlen.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 12/13] genetlink: allow families to use split ops directly
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 12:57:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221019125745.3f2e7659@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dfac0b6e09e9739c7f613cb8ed77c81f9db0bb44.camel@sipsolutions.net>
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 21:37:41 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > You mean "Full ops would have [...] while split ops allow individual
> > > [...]" or so?
> >
> > Split ops end up being larger as we need a separate entry for each
> > do and dump. So I think it's right?
>
> Indeed.
>
> Oh, I see now, you were basically saying "it's only 9% bigger for all
> that extra flexibility" ... didn't read that right before.
Yup, BTW one annoying bit is that we treat maxattr == 0 as
"no validation" rather than "reject everything".
Right now I add a reject-all policy in the family itself (with two
entries, argh), and hook it up to parameter-less dumps. But we could
do something else - like modify the behavior in case the op was declared
as split at the family level.
I opted for having family add the reject-all policy because I code gen
the policies based on YAML spec, anyway, so not much extra effort, and
the uniformity between different type of ops seems worth maintaining.
WDYT?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-19 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-18 23:07 [PATCH net-next 00/13] genetlink: support per op type policies Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 01/13] genetlink: refactor the cmd <> policy mapping dump Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 7:50 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 15:59 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:20 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 02/13] genetlink: move the private fields in struct genl_family Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 7:51 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 21:21 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 03/13] genetlink: introduce split op representation Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 7:59 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:14 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 19:36 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:50 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:28 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 04/13] genetlink: load policy based on validation flags Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 8:01 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:20 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 19:33 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:49 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 05/13] genetlink: check for callback type at op load time Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:33 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-19 21:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 06/13] genetlink: add policies for both doit and dumpit in ctrl_dumppolicy_start() Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 8:08 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:22 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 07/13] genetlink: support split policies in ctrl_dumppolicy_put_op() Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:38 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-19 21:46 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 08/13] genetlink: inline genl_get_cmd() Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:46 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 09/13] genetlink: add iterator for walking family ops Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:49 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 10/13] genetlink: use iterator in the op to policy map dumping Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 21:53 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 11/13] genetlink: inline old iteration helpers Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 22:15 ` Jacob Keller
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 12/13] genetlink: allow families to use split ops directly Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 8:15 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:25 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-19 19:37 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-19 19:57 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-10-20 7:32 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-20 18:09 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-21 11:02 ` Johannes Berg
2022-10-21 15:01 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-18 23:07 ` [PATCH net-next 13/13] genetlink: convert control family to split ops Jakub Kicinski
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=20221019125745.3f2e7659@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=gnault@redhat.com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
/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).