From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
razor@blackwall.org, pabeni@redhat.com, willemb@google.com,
sdf@fomichev.me, john.fastabend@gmail.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
jordan@jrife.io, maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com,
magnus.karlsson@intel.com, dw@davidwei.uk, toke@redhat.com,
yangzhenze@bytedance.com, wangdongdong.6@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 02/16] net: Implement netdev_nl_queue_create_doit
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 15:45:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260131154523.5e495380@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260129222830.439687-3-daniel@iogearbox.net>
On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 23:28:16 +0100 Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Implement netdev_nl_queue_create_doit which creates a new rx queue in a
> virtual netdev and then leases it to a rx queue in a physical netdev.
>
> Example with ynl client:
>
> # ./pyynl/cli.py \
> --spec ~/netlink/specs/netdev.yaml \
nit: please use "ynl --family netdev" instead of ./pyynl/cli.py
--spec...
> Note that the netdevice locking order is always from the virtual to
> the physical device.
There is a big comment in netdevice.h (search for "netdev-scope lock")
documenting the instance lock, since you are adding technical deb^w^w
an ordering rule we should mention it there concisely and also update
the "netdev instance lock" section of netdevices.rst
> + int (*ndo_queue_create)(struct net_device *dev);
please propagate extack to the driver
> unsigned int supported_params;
> };
> @@ -185,7 +191,9 @@ struct netdev_queue_mgmt_ops {
> void netdev_queue_config(struct net_device *dev, int rxq,
> struct netdev_queue_config *qcfg);
>
> -bool netif_rxq_has_unreadable_mp(struct net_device *dev, int idx);
> +bool netif_rxq_has_unreadable_mp(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx);
> +bool netif_rxq_has_mp(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx);
> +bool netif_rxq_is_leased(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx);
The new function is internal to the core, please add the declarations
in the appropriate place in net/core/dev.h instead.
Coincidentally we should probably delete netif_rxq_has_unreadable_mp()
completely and pass the "has unreadable mp" as a flag inside qcfg
instead. I'll clean that up after your patches.
> /**
> * DOC: Lockless queue stopping / waking helpers.
> @@ -374,5 +382,10 @@ static inline unsigned int netif_xmit_timeout_ms(struct netdev_queue *txq)
> })
>
> struct device *netdev_queue_get_dma_dev(struct net_device *dev, int idx);
> -
> -#endif
> +bool netdev_can_create_queue(const struct net_device *dev,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
> +bool netdev_can_lease_queue(const struct net_device *dev,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
> +bool netdev_queue_busy(struct net_device *dev, int idx,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack);
ditto. FWIW it's fine for ethtool to include using a relative path,
it already does that in a few places
> +#endif /* _LINUX_NET_QUEUES_H */
> diff --git a/include/net/netdev_rx_queue.h b/include/net/netdev_rx_queue.h
> index cfa72c485387..967bec9b3c6a 100644
> --- a/include/net/netdev_rx_queue.h
> +++ b/include/net/netdev_rx_queue.h
> @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ struct netdev_rx_queue {
> struct napi_struct *napi;
> struct netdev_queue_config qcfg;
> struct pp_memory_provider_params mp_params;
Could you add a comment here explaining whether this pointer is to
or from the lease or both, depending whether the device is virt?
> + struct netdev_rx_queue *lease;
> + netdevice_tracker lease_tracker;
> } ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>
> /*
> @@ -59,5 +61,8 @@ get_netdev_rx_queue_index(struct netdev_rx_queue *queue)
> }
>
> int netdev_rx_queue_restart(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq);
> -
> -#endif
> +void netdev_rx_queue_lease(struct netdev_rx_queue *rxq_dst,
> + struct netdev_rx_queue *rxq_src);
> +void netdev_rx_queue_unlease(struct netdev_rx_queue *rxq_dst,
> + struct netdev_rx_queue *rxq_src);
dev.h
> int netdev_nl_queue_create_doit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
> {
> - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + const int qmaxtype = ARRAY_SIZE(netdev_queue_id_nl_policy) - 1;
> + const int lmaxtype = ARRAY_SIZE(netdev_lease_nl_policy) - 1;
> + int err, ifindex, ifindex_lease, queue_id, queue_id_lease;
> + struct nlattr *qtb[ARRAY_SIZE(netdev_queue_id_nl_policy)];
> + struct nlattr *ltb[ARRAY_SIZE(netdev_lease_nl_policy)];
> + struct netdev_rx_queue *rxq, *rxq_lease;
> + struct net_device *dev, *dev_lease;
> + netdevice_tracker dev_tracker;
> + s32 netns_lease = -1;
> + struct nlattr *nest;
> + struct sk_buff *rsp;
> + struct net *net;
> + void *hdr;
> +
> + if (GENL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_IFINDEX) ||
> + GENL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE) ||
> + GENL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_LEASE))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (nla_get_u32(info->attrs[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE]) !=
> + NETDEV_QUEUE_TYPE_RX) {
> + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(info->extack, info->attrs[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE]);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + ifindex = nla_get_u32(info->attrs[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_IFINDEX]);
> +
> + nest = info->attrs[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_LEASE];
> + err = nla_parse_nested(ltb, lmaxtype, nest,
> + netdev_lease_nl_policy, info->extack);
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err;
> + if (NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info->extack, nest, ltb, NETDEV_A_LEASE_IFINDEX) ||
> + NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info->extack, nest, ltb, NETDEV_A_LEASE_QUEUE))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (ltb[NETDEV_A_LEASE_NETNS_ID]) {
> + netns_lease = nla_get_s32(ltb[NETDEV_A_LEASE_NETNS_ID]);
> + if (netns_lease < 0) {
Let's add this to the spec / policy then?
checks:
min: 0
> + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(info->extack, ltb[NETDEV_A_LEASE_NETNS_ID]);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
> + return -EPERM;
> + }
> +
> + ifindex_lease = nla_get_u32(ltb[NETDEV_A_LEASE_IFINDEX]);
> +
> + nest = ltb[NETDEV_A_LEASE_QUEUE];
> + err = nla_parse_nested(qtb, qmaxtype, nest,
> + netdev_queue_id_nl_policy, info->extack);
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err;
> + if (NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info->extack, nest, qtb, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_ID) ||
> + NL_REQ_ATTR_CHECK(info->extack, nest, qtb, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (nla_get_u32(qtb[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE]) != NETDEV_QUEUE_TYPE_RX) {
> + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(info->extack, qtb[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_TYPE]);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + queue_id_lease = nla_get_u32(qtb[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_ID]);
> +
> + rsp = genlmsg_new(GENLMSG_DEFAULT_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rsp)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + hdr = genlmsg_iput(rsp, info);
> + if (!hdr) {
> + err = -EMSGSIZE;
> + goto err_genlmsg_free;
> + }
> +
> + /* Locking order is always from the virtual to the physical device
> + * since this is also the same order when applications open the
> + * memory provider later on.
> + */
> + dev = netdev_get_by_index_lock(genl_info_net(info), ifindex);
> + if (!dev) {
> + err = -ENODEV;
> + goto err_genlmsg_free;
> + }
> + if (!netdev_can_create_queue(dev, info->extack)) {
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_unlock_dev;
> + }
> +
> + net = genl_info_net(info);
> + if (netns_lease >= 0) {
> + net = get_net_ns_by_id(net, netns_lease);
> + if (!net) {
> + err = -ENONET;
> + goto err_unlock_dev;
> + }
> + }
> + if (net_eq(net, dev_net(dev)) &&
> + ifindex == ifindex_lease) {
Is this check actually needed? The device can't be physical and virtual
at once so the locking safety check would fail anyway, no?
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(info->extack,
> + "Lease ifindex cannot be the same as queue creation ifindex");
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_put_netns;
> + }
> +
> + dev_lease = netdev_get_by_index(net, ifindex_lease, &dev_tracker,
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!dev_lease) {
> + err = -ENODEV;
> + goto err_put_netns;
> + }
> + if (!netdev_can_lease_queue(dev_lease, info->extack)) {
> + netdev_put(dev_lease, &dev_tracker);
> + err = -EINVAL;
> + goto err_put_netns;
> + }
> +
> + dev_lease = netdev_put_lock(dev_lease, &dev_tracker);
> + if (!dev_lease) {
> + err = -ENODEV;
> + goto err_put_netns;
> + }
> + if (queue_id_lease >= dev_lease->real_num_rx_queues) {
> + err = -ERANGE;
> + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(info->extack, qtb[NETDEV_A_QUEUE_ID]);
> + goto err_unlock_dev_lease;
> + }
> + if (netdev_queue_busy(dev_lease, queue_id_lease, info->extack)) {
> + err = -EBUSY;
> + goto err_unlock_dev_lease;
> + }
> +
> + rxq_lease = __netif_get_rx_queue(dev_lease, queue_id_lease);
> + rxq = __netif_get_rx_queue(dev, dev->real_num_rx_queues - 1);
> +
> + if (rxq->lease && rxq->lease->dev != dev_lease) {
IIUC the simplification of having all leases from one devices is still
a netkit thing? I mean - there's nothing in the core that depends on
this, just the cleanup / notifier handling in netkit? If that's the
case let's move this check into netkit.
Sorry if you moved this here because I asked to move as much as
possible into the core.
> + err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(info->extack,
> + "Leasing multiple queues from different devices not supported");
> + goto err_unlock_dev_lease;
> + }
> +
> + err = queue_id = dev->queue_mgmt_ops->ndo_queue_create(dev);
> + if (err < 0) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(info->extack,
> + "Device is unable to create a new queue");
As flagged, if we pass extack to the driver it should be able to give us
a more accurate reason
> + goto err_unlock_dev_lease;
> + }
> +
> + rxq = __netif_get_rx_queue(dev, queue_id);
> + netdev_rx_queue_lease(rxq, rxq_lease);
nit: the call to __netif_get_rx_queue() could move into
netdev_rx_queue_lease()
> + nla_put_u32(rsp, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_ID, queue_id);
> + genlmsg_end(rsp, hdr);
> +
> + netdev_unlock(dev_lease);
> + netdev_unlock(dev);
> + if (netns_lease >= 0)
> + put_net(net);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-31 23:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-29 22:28 [PATCH net-next v8 00/16] netkit: Support for io_uring zero-copy and AF_XDP Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 01/16] net: Add queue-create operation Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 02/16] net: Implement netdev_nl_queue_create_doit Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-31 23:45 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-03-05 4:38 ` Daniel Borkmann
2026-03-06 2:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-06 5:49 ` Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 03/16] net: Add lease info to queue-get response Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-31 23:43 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 0:15 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 04/16] net, ethtool: Disallow leased real rxqs to be resized Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-31 23:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 05/16] net: Slightly simplify net_mp_{open,close}_rxq Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-31 23:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 06/16] net: Proxy net_mp_{open,close}_rxq for leased queues Daniel Borkmann
2026-02-01 0:02 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 22:09 ` David Wei
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 07/16] net: Proxy netdev_queue_get_dma_dev " Daniel Borkmann
2026-02-01 0:04 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 22:23 ` David Wei
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 08/16] xsk: Extend xsk_rcv_check validation Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 09/16] xsk: Proxy pool management for leased queues Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 10/16] netkit: Add single device mode for netkit Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 11/16] netkit: Implement rtnl_link_ops->alloc and ndo_queue_create Daniel Borkmann
2026-02-01 0:19 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 22:27 ` David Wei
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 12/16] netkit: Add netkit notifier to check for unregistering devices Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 13/16] netkit: Add xsk support for af_xdp applications Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 14/16] selftests/net: Add bpf skb forwarding program Daniel Borkmann
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 15/16] selftests/net: Add env for container based tests Daniel Borkmann
2026-02-01 0:38 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 22:53 ` David Wei
2026-02-02 18:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-10 0:25 ` David Wei
2026-02-05 2:08 ` Bobby Eshleman
2026-02-05 2:34 ` Bobby Eshleman
2026-02-10 17:30 ` David Wei
2026-01-29 22:28 ` [PATCH net-next v8 16/16] selftests/net: Add netkit container tests Daniel Borkmann
2026-02-01 0:24 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-01 22:54 ` David Wei
2026-02-05 1:44 ` Bobby Eshleman
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=20260131154523.5e495380@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dw@davidwei.uk \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jordan@jrife.io \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=wangdongdong.6@bytedance.com \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
--cc=yangzhenze@bytedance.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