From: Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>
To: Breno Leitao <[email protected]>,
Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>,
[email protected]
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>, David Ahern <[email protected]>,
Willem de Bruijn <[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2023 15:41:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:24:31AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > How to handle these contradictory behaviour ahead of time (at callee
> > > time, where the buffers will be prepared)?
> >
> > Ah you found a counter-example to the simple pattern of put_user.
> >
> > The answer perhaps depends on how many such counter-examples you
> > encounter in the list you gave. If this is the only one, exceptions
> > in the wrapper are reasonable. Not if there are many.
>
>
> Hello Williem,
>
> I spend sometime dealing with it, and the best way for me to figure out
> how much work this is, was implementing a PoC. You can find a basic PoC
> in the link below. It is not 100% complete (still need to convert 4
> simple ioctls), but, it deals with the most complicated cases. The
> missing parts are straighforward if we are OK with this approach.
>
> https://github.com/leitao/linux/commits/ioctl_refactor
>
> Details
> =======
>
> 1) Change the ioctl callback to use kernel memory arguments. This
> changes a lot of files but most of them are trivial. This is the new
> ioctl callback:
>
> struct proto {
>
> int (*ioctl)(struct sock *sk, int cmd,
> - unsigned long arg);
> + int *karg);
>
> You can see the full changeset in the following commit (which is
> the last in the tree above)
> https://github.com/leitao/linux/commit/ad78da14601b078c4b6a9f63a86032467ab59bf7
>
> 2) Create a wrapper (sock_skprot_ioctl()) that should be called instead
> of sk->sk_prot->ioctl(). For every exception, calls a specific function
> for the exception (basically ipmr_ioctl and ipmr_ioctl) (see more on 3)
>
> This is the commit https://github.com/leitao/linux/commit/511592e549c39ef0de19efa2eb4382cac5786227
>
> 3) There are two exceptions, they are ip{6}mr_ioctl() and pn_ioctl().
> ip{6}mr is the hardest one, and I implemented the exception flow for it.
>
> You could find ipmr changes here:
> https://github.com/leitao/linux/commit/659a76dc0547ab2170023f31e20115520ebe33d9
>
> Is this what you had in mind?
>
> Thank you!
Thanks for the series, Breno. Yes, this looks very much what I hoped for.
The series shows two cases of ioctls: getters that return an int, and
combined getter/setters that take a struct of a certain size and
return the exact same.
I would deduplicate the four ipmr/ip6mr cases that constitute the second
type, by having a single helper for this type. sock_skprot_ioctl_struct,
which takes an argument for the struct size to copy in/out.
Did this series cover all proto ioctls, or is this still a subset just
for demonstration purposes -- and might there still be other types
lurking elsewhere?
If this is all, this looks like a reasonable amount of code churn to me.
Three small points
* please keep the __user annotation. Use make C=2 when unsure to warn
about mismatched annotation
* minor: special case the ipmr (type 2) ioctls in sock_skprot_ioctl
and treat the "return int" (type 1) ioctls as the default case.
* introduce code in a patch together with its use-case, so no separate
patches for sock_skprot_ioctl and sock_skprot_ioctl_ipmr. Either one
patch, or two, for each type of conversion.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-18 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 14:43 [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] net: wire up support for file_operations->uring_cmd() Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to UDP Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:54 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to TCP Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 14:43 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] net: add uring_cmd callback to raw "protocol" Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 15:34 ` [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-06 15:59 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 18:16 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-07 2:46 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 12:00 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 14:36 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 14:41 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 14:51 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 14:54 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:00 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:06 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:28 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 13:53 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-12 14:28 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 0:02 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-13 14:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-13 14:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-04-13 14:57 ` David Laight
2023-04-18 13:23 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-18 19:41 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2023-04-20 14:43 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-20 16:48 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-04-11 15:10 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:17 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-11 15:27 ` David Ahern
2023-04-11 15:29 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-12 7:39 ` David Laight
2023-04-06 16:41 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-06 16:49 ` Jens Axboe
2023-04-06 16:58 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-06 16:57 ` [PATCH RFC] io_uring: Pass whole sqe to commands Breno Leitao
2023-04-07 18:51 ` Keith Busch
2023-04-11 12:22 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-11 12:39 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-13 2:56 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-13 16:47 ` Breno Leitao
2023-04-14 2:12 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-14 13:12 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-14 13:59 ` Ming Lei
2023-04-14 14:56 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-04-16 9:51 ` Ming Lei
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-05-02 9:21 [PATCH 0/5] add initial io_uring_cmd support for sockets Adrien Delorme
2023-05-02 13:03 ` Pavel Begunkov
2023-05-03 13:11 ` Adrien Delorme
2023-05-03 13:27 ` David Laight
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=643ef2643f3ce_352b2f2945d@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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