From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, "hare@suse.com" <hare@suse.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>,
"jmeneghi@redhat.com" <jmeneghi@redhat.com>,
Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] net/handshake: Add support for PF_HANDSHAKE
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 20:35:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230130203526.52738cba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <860B3B8A-1322-478E-8BF9-C5A3444227F7@oracle.com>
On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 14:06:49 +0000 Chuck Lever III wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 2023, at 3:32 AM, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 11:02:22 -0500 Chuck Lever wrote:
> >> I've designed a way to pass a connected kernel socket endpoint to
> >> user space using the traditional listen/accept mechanism. accept(2)
> >> gives us a well-worn building block that can materialize a connected
> >> socket endpoint as a file descriptor in a specific user space
> >> process. Like any open socket descriptor, the accepted FD can then
> >> be passed to a library such as GnuTLS to perform a TLS handshake.
> >
> > I can't bring myself to like the new socket family layer.
>
> poll/listen/accept is the simplest and most natural way of
> materializing a socket endpoint in a process that I can think
> of. It's a well-understood building block. What specifically
> is troubling you about it?
poll/listen/accept yes, but that's not the entire socket interface.
Our overall experience with the TCP ULPs is rather painful, proxying
all the other callbacks here may add another dimension.
Also I have a fear (perhaps unjustified) of reusing constructs which are
cornerstones of the networking stack and treating them as abstractions.
> > I'd like a second opinion on that, if anyone within netdev
> > is willing to share..
>
> Hopefully that opinion comes with an alternative way of getting
> a connected kernel socket endpoint up to user space without
> race issues.
If the user application decides the fd, wouldn't that solve the problem
in netlink?
kernel user space
notification ---------->
(new connection awaits)
<----------
request (target fd=100)
---------->
reply
(fd 100 is installed;
extra params)
> We need to make some progress on this. If you don't have a
> technical objection, I think we should go with this with the
> idea that eventually something more palatable will come along
> to replace it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-31 4:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-26 16:02 [PATCH v2 0/3] Another crack at a handshake upcall mechanism Chuck Lever
2023-01-26 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: Add an AF_HANDSHAKE address family Chuck Lever
2023-01-26 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] net/handshake: Add support for PF_HANDSHAKE Chuck Lever
2023-01-28 8:32 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-01-28 14:06 ` Chuck Lever III
2023-01-31 4:35 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-01-31 15:18 ` Chuck Lever III
2023-01-31 19:30 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-01-31 19:34 ` Chuck Lever III
2023-01-31 20:23 ` Marcel Holtmann
2023-01-31 20:26 ` Benjamin Coddington
2023-01-28 17:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2023-01-29 16:53 ` Chuck Lever III
2023-01-29 16:21 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-01-30 13:44 ` Marcel Holtmann
2023-01-30 15:00 ` Chuck Lever III
2023-01-31 7:40 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-01-31 14:17 ` Marcel Holtmann
2023-01-31 14:47 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-01-31 20:32 ` Marcel Holtmann
2023-02-01 7:09 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-02-02 17:13 ` Xin Long
2023-02-02 17:32 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-01-26 16:02 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] net/tls: Support AF_HANDSHAKE in kTLS Chuck Lever
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=20230130203526.52738cba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=bcodding@redhat.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hare@suse.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=jmeneghi@redhat.com \
--cc=kolga@netapp.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).