RE: [PATCH V4 4/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to register callbacks to process hvsock connection
From: Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
Date: 2015-08-06 05:09:37
Also in:
lkml
From: devel [mailto:driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org] On Behalf Of Dexuan Cui Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 18:20 To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>; KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com> Cc: olaf@aepfle.de; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; jasowang@redhat.com; driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; stephen@networkplumber.org; stefanha@redhat.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; apw@canonical.com; pebolle@tiscali.nl; dan.carpenter@oracle.com Subject: RE: [PATCH V4 4/7] Drivers: hv: vmbus: add APIs to register callbacks to process hvsock connectionquoted
From: David Miller Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 6:27 From: Dexuan Cui Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 05:35:11 -0700quoted
With the 2 APIs supplied by the VMBus driver, the coming net/hvsock driver can register 2 callbacks and can know when a new hvsock connection is offered by the host, and when a hvsock connection is being closed by the host.This is an extremely terrible interface. It's an opaque hook that allows on registry, and it's solve purpose is to allow a backdoor call into a foreign driver in another module. These are exactly the things we try to avoid.Hi David, Thanks a lot for your reviewing and the suggestion!quoted
Why not create a real abstraction where clients register an object, that can be contained as a sub-member inside of their own driver private, that provides the callback registry mechanism.
Hi David, Can you please have a look at my below questions? I like your idea of a real abstraction. Your answer would definitely help me to implement that correctly.
Please pardon me for my inexperience. Can you please be a bit more specific? I guess maybe you're referencing a common design pattern in the driver code, so an example in some existing driver would be the best. :-) "clients register an object " -- does the "clients" mean the hvsock driver? and the "object" means the 2 callbacks? IMHO, here the vmbus driver has to synchronously pass the 2 events to the hvsock driver, so a "backdoor call into the hvsock driver" is inevitable anyway? e.g., in the path vmbus_process_offer() -> hvsock_process_offer(), the return value of the latter is important to the former, because on error the former needs to clean up some internal states of the vmbus driver (that is, the "goto err_deq_chan").quoted
That way you can register multiple clients, do things like allow AF_PACKET capturing of vmbus traffic, etc.I thought AF_PACKET can only capture IP packets or Ethernet frames. Can it be used to capture AF_UNIX packet? If yes, I suppose we can consider making it work for AF_HYPERV too, if people ask for that. -- Dexuan
Thanks, -- Dexuan