Re: [PATCH net-next v2] netdev-genl: Elide napi_id when not present
From: Joe Damato <hidden>
Date: 2025-02-04 18:28:26
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 06:41:34AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 8:17 PM Joe Damato [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
There are at least two cases where napi_id may not present and the napi_id should be elided: 1. Queues could be created, but napi_enable may not have been called yet. In this case, there may be a NAPI but it may not have an ID and output of a napi_id should be elided. 2. TX-only NAPIs currently do not have NAPI IDs. If a TX queue happens to be linked with a TX-only NAPI, elide the NAPI ID from the netlink output as a NAPI ID of 0 is not useful for users. Signed-off-by: Joe Damato <redacted> --- v2: - Updated to elide NAPI IDs for RX queues which may have not called napi_enable yet. rfc: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250128163038.429864-1-jdamato@fastly.com/ (local) net/core/netdev-genl.c | 14 ++++++++------ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)diff --git a/net/core/netdev-genl.c b/net/core/netdev-genl.c index 715f85c6b62e..a97d3b99f6cd 100644 --- a/net/core/netdev-genl.c +++ b/net/core/netdev-genl.c@@ -385,9 +385,10 @@ netdev_nl_queue_fill_one(struct sk_buff *rsp, struct net_device *netdev, switch (q_type) { case NETDEV_QUEUE_TYPE_RX: rxq = __netif_get_rx_queue(netdev, q_idx); - if (rxq->napi && nla_put_u32(rsp, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_NAPI_ID, - rxq->napi->napi_id)) - goto nla_put_failure; + if (rxq->napi && rxq->napi->napi_id >= MIN_NAPI_ID) + if (nla_put_u32(rsp, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_NAPI_ID, + rxq->napi->napi_id)) + goto nla_put_failure; binding = rxq->mp_params.mp_priv; if (binding &&@@ -397,9 +398,10 @@ netdev_nl_queue_fill_one(struct sk_buff *rsp, struct net_device *netdev, break; case NETDEV_QUEUE_TYPE_TX: txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(netdev, q_idx); - if (txq->napi && nla_put_u32(rsp, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_NAPI_ID, - txq->napi->napi_id)) - goto nla_put_failure; + if (txq->napi && txq->napi->napi_id >= MIN_NAPI_ID) + if (nla_put_u32(rsp, NETDEV_A_QUEUE_NAPI_ID, + txq->napi->napi_id)) + goto nla_put_failure; }Hi Joe This might be time to add helpers, we now have these checks about MIN_NAPI_ID all around the places.
I'm not sure what the right etiquette is; I was thinking of just taking the patch you proposed below and submitting it with you as the author with my Reviewed-by. Is that OK and if so, are you OK with the commit message?