From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D78A8ECAAD2 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:08:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229922AbiHZIIg (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 04:08:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59798 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229532AbiHZIIf (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 04:08:35 -0400 Received: from relay8-d.mail.gandi.net (relay8-d.mail.gandi.net [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc4:8::228]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98312D475F; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 01:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: (Authenticated sender: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com) by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A5BF1BF204; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 08:08:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1661501308; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=u6JpZSoa946jk0BQxxzywAyZYUXfBX6HOgUDYQzAJ4A=; b=X0vTU2ByLWlmQJ1bNfwXwUYouYthAJ4I0lcBsyewyEd3lNlTEaTzcCFTU4aXUyD48mWXEj W46NKtmSstLnPWL1PWPgkQX+JL9Ku70NpU+If3JQEc+InfsIDS6KBxU+mGh3MeN9gAwQEc U0At+95FTR6pxonsAny00C8HBuwHt9Kngq11iZ1UB2WJGDaUvEetX9PqwQeQzNkkncZDlQ dWcE6Ya+s6SUxvohZHs8g/wNf5mTz9dVm/9qrggZVE3H7vdnSUJi5PdP3DuChetyIcEOJ7 8DKL6WPtpxmKydeFgVc7Lc3D4uCiR5JVGw8Us5TOFOwsckdGjXhg4F6cctAROg== Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 10:08:25 +0200 From: Miquel Raynal To: Alexander Aring Cc: Alexander Aring , Stefan Schmidt , linux-wpan - ML , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Eric Dumazet , Network Development , David Girault , Romuald Despres , Frederic Blain , Nicolas Schodet , Thomas Petazzoni Subject: Re: [PATCH wpan-next 01/20] net: mac802154: Allow the creation of coordinator interfaces Message-ID: <20220826100825.4f79c777@xps-13> In-Reply-To: References: <20220701143052.1267509-1-miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> <20220701143052.1267509-2-miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> <20220819191109.0e639918@xps-13> <20220823182950.1c722e13@xps-13> <20220824093547.16f05d15@xps-13> <20220825104035.11806a67@xps-13> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.0.0 (GTK+ 3.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org Hi Alexander, aahringo@redhat.com wrote on Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:35:05 -0400: > Hi, >=20 > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 8:51 PM Alexander Aring wro= te: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 4:41 AM Miquel Raynal wrote: =20 > > > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > aahringo@redhat.com wrote on Wed, 24 Aug 2022 17:43:11 -0400: > > > =20 > > > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 3:35 AM Miquel Raynal wrote: =20 > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > > > > > aahringo@redhat.com wrote on Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:44:52 -0400: > > > > > =20 > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 12:29 PM Miquel Raynal > > > > > > wrote: =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aahringo@redhat.com wrote on Tue, 23 Aug 2022 08:33:30 -0400: > > > > > > > =20 > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 1:11 PM Miquel Raynal wrote: =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alexander, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > aahringo@redhat.com wrote on Tue, 5 Jul 2022 21:51:02 -04= 00: > > > > > > > > > =20 > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 10:36 AM Miquel Raynal wrote: =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As a first strep in introducing proper PAN management= and association, > > > > > > > > > > > we need to be able to create coordinator interfaces w= hich might act as > > > > > > > > > > > coordinator or PAN coordinator. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hence, let's add the minimum support to allow the cre= ation of these > > > > > > > > > > > interfaces. This might be restrained and improved lat= er. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > net/mac802154/iface.c | 14 ++++++++------ > > > > > > > > > > > net/mac802154/rx.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/net/mac802154/iface.c b/net/mac802154/if= ace.c > > > > > > > > > > > index 500ed1b81250..7ac0c5685d3f 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/net/mac802154/iface.c > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/net/mac802154/iface.c > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -273,13 +273,13 @@ ieee802154_check_concurrent_ifa= ce(struct ieee802154_sub_if_data *sdata, > > > > > > > > > > > if (nsdata !=3D sdata && ieee802154_s= data_running(nsdata)) { > > > > > > > > > > > int ret; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - /* TODO currently we don't su= pport multiple node types > > > > > > > > > > > - * we need to run skb_clone a= t rx path. Check if there > > > > > > > > > > > - * exist really an use case i= f we need to support > > > > > > > > > > > - * multiple node types at the= same time. > > > > > > > > > > > + /* TODO currently we don't su= pport multiple node/coord > > > > > > > > > > > + * types we need to run skb_c= lone at rx path. Check if > > > > > > > > > > > + * there exist really an use = case if we need to support > > > > > > > > > > > + * multiple node/coord types = at the same time. > > > > > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > - if (wpan_dev->iftype =3D=3D N= L802154_IFTYPE_NODE && > > > > > > > > > > > - nsdata->wpan_dev.iftype = =3D=3D NL802154_IFTYPE_NODE) > > > > > > > > > > > + if (wpan_dev->iftype !=3D NL8= 02154_IFTYPE_MONITOR && > > > > > > > > > > > + nsdata->wpan_dev.iftype != =3D NL802154_IFTYPE_MONITOR) > > > > > > > > > > > return -EBUSY; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /* check all phy mac sublayer= settings are the same. > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -577,6 +577,7 @@ ieee802154_setup_sdata(struct iee= e802154_sub_if_data *sdata, > > > > > > > > > > > wpan_dev->short_addr =3D cpu_to_le16(IEEE8021= 54_ADDR_BROADCAST); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > switch (type) { > > > > > > > > > > > + case NL802154_IFTYPE_COORD: > > > > > > > > > > > case NL802154_IFTYPE_NODE: > > > > > > > > > > > ieee802154_be64_to_le64(&wpan_dev->ex= tended_addr, > > > > > > > > > > > sdata->dev->d= ev_addr); > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -636,6 +637,7 @@ ieee802154_if_add(struct ieee8021= 54_local *local, const char *name, > > > > > > > > > > > ieee802154_le64_to_be64(ndev->perm_addr, > > > > > > > > > > > &local->hw.phy->perm_= extended_addr); > > > > > > > > > > > switch (type) { > > > > > > > > > > > + case NL802154_IFTYPE_COORD: > > > > > > > > > > > case NL802154_IFTYPE_NODE: > > > > > > > > > > > ndev->type =3D ARPHRD_IEEE802154; > > > > > > > > > > > if (ieee802154_is_valid_extended_unic= ast_addr(extended_addr)) { > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/net/mac802154/rx.c b/net/mac802154/rx.c > > > > > > > > > > > index b8ce84618a55..39459d8d787a 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/net/mac802154/rx.c > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/net/mac802154/rx.c > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ __ieee802154_rx_handle_packet(str= uct ieee802154_local *local, > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdata, &local->interf= aces, list) { > > > > > > > > > > > - if (sdata->wpan_dev.iftype !=3D NL802= 154_IFTYPE_NODE) > > > > > > > > > > > + if (sdata->wpan_dev.iftype =3D=3D NL8= 02154_IFTYPE_MONITOR) > > > > > > > > > > > continue; =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I probably get why you are doing that, but first the ov= erall design is > > > > > > > > > > working differently - means you should add an additiona= l receive path > > > > > > > > > > for the special interface type. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also we "discovered" before that the receive path of no= de vs > > > > > > > > > > coordinator is different... Where is the different hand= ling here? I > > > > > > > > > > don't see it, I see that NODE and COORD are the same no= w (because that > > > > > > > > > > is _currently_ everything else than monitor). This chan= ge is not > > > > > > > > > > enough and does "something" to handle in some way coord= inator receive > > > > > > > > > > path but there are things missing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Changing the address filters that it signals the tra= nsceiver it's > > > > > > > > > > acting as coordinator > > > > > > > > > > 2. We _should_ also have additional handling for whatev= er the > > > > > > > > > > additional handling what address filters are doing in m= ac802154 > > > > > > > > > > _because_ there is hardware which doesn't have address = filtering e.g. > > > > > > > > > > hwsim which depend that this is working in software lik= e other > > > > > > > > > > transceiver hardware address filters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For the 2. one, I don't know if we do that even for NOD= E right or we > > > > > > > > > > just have the bare minimal support there... I don't ass= ume that > > > > > > > > > > everything is working correctly here but what I want to= see is a > > > > > > > > > > separate receive path for coordinators that people can = send patches to > > > > > > > > > > fix it. =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we do very little differently between the two modes,= that's why I > > > > > > > > > took the easy way: just changing the condition. I really = don't see what > > > > > > > > > I can currently add here, but I am fine changing the styl= e to easily > > > > > > > > > show people where to add filters for such or such interfa= ce, but right > > > > > > > > > now both path will look very "identical", do we agree on = that? =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mostly yes, but there exists a difference and we should at = least check > > > > > > > > if the node receive path violates the coordinator receive p= ath and > > > > > > > > vice versa. > > > > > > > > Put it in a receive_path() function and then coord_receive_= path(), > > > > > > > > node_receive_path() that calls the receive_path() and do the > > > > > > > > additional filtering for coordinators, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There should be a part in the standard about "third level f= ilter rule > > > > > > > > if it's a coordinator". > > > > > > > > btw: this is because the address filter on the transceiver = needs to > > > > > > > > have the "i am a coordinator" boolean set which is missing = in this > > > > > > > > series. However it depends on the transceiver filtering lev= el and the > > > > > > > > mac802154 receive path if we actually need to run such filt= ering or > > > > > > > > not. =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I must be missing some information because I can't find any p= laces > > > > > > > where what you suggest is described in the spec. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree there are multiple filtering level so let's go throug= h them one > > > > > > > by one (6.7.2 Reception and rejection): > > > > > > > - first level: is the checksum (FCS) valid? > > > > > > > yes -> goto second level > > > > > > > no -> drop > > > > > > > - second level: are we in promiscuous mode? > > > > > > > yes -> forward to upper layers > > > > > > > no -> goto second level (bis) > > > > > > > - second level (bis): are we scanning? > > > > > > > yes -> goto scan filtering > > > > > > > no -> goto third level > > > > > > > - scan filtering: is it a beacon? > > > > > > > yes -> process the beacon > > > > > > > no -> drop > > > > > > > - third level: is the frame valid? (type, source, destination= , pan id, > > > > > > > etc) > > > > > > > yes -> forward to upper layers > > > > > > > no -> drop > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But none of them, as you said, is dependent on the interface = type. > > > > > > > There is no mention of a specific filtering operation to do i= n all > > > > > > > those cases when running in COORD mode. So I still don't get = what > > > > > > > should be included in either node_receive_path() which should= be > > > > > > > different than in coord_receive_path() for now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are, however, two situations where the interface type h= as its > > > > > > > importance: > > > > > > > - Enhanced beacon requests with Enhanced beacon filter IE, wh= ich asks > > > > > > > the receiving device to process/drop the request upon certa= in > > > > > > > conditions (minimum LQI and/or randomness), as detailed in > > > > > > > 7.4.4.6 Enhanced Beacon Filter IE. But, as mentioned in > > > > > > > 7.5.9 Enhanced Beacon Request command: "The Enhanced Beacon= Request > > > > > > > command is optional for an FFD and an RFD", so this series = was only > > > > > > > targeting basic beaconing for now. > > > > > > > - In relaying mode, the destination address must not be valid= ated > > > > > > > because the message needs to be re-emitted. Indeed, a recei= ver in > > > > > > > relaying mode may not be the recipient. This is also option= al and out > > > > > > > of the scope of this series. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right now I have the below diff, which clarifies the two path= , without > > > > > > > too much changes in the current code because I don't really s= ee why it > > > > > > > would be necessary. Unless you convince me otherwise or read = the spec > > > > > > > differently than I do :) What do you think? > > > > > > > =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > "Reception and rejection" > > > > > > > > > > > > third-level filtering regarding "destination address" and if the > > > > > > device is "PAN coordinator". > > > > > > This is, in my opinion, what the coordinator boolean tells the > > > > > > transceiver to do on hardware when doing address filter there. = You can > > > > > > also read that up in datasheets of transceivers as atf86rf233, = search > > > > > > for I_AM_COORD. =20 > > > > > > > > > > Oh right, I now see what you mean! > > > > > =20 > > > > > > Whereas they use the word "PAN coordinator" not "coordinator", = if they > > > > > > really make a difference there at this point..., if so then the= kernel > > > > > > must know if the coordinator is a pan coordinator or coordinator > > > > > > because we need to set the address filter in kernel. =20 > > > > > > > > > > Yes we need to make a difference, you can have several coordinato= rs but > > > > > a single PAN coordinator in a PAN. I think we can assume that the= PAN > > > > > coordinator is the coordinator with no parent (association-wise).= With > > > > > the addition of the association series, I can handle that, so I w= ill > > > > > create the two path as you advise, add a comment about this addit= ional > > > > > filter rule that we don't yet support, and finally after the > > > > > association series add another commit to make this filtering rule= real. > > > > > =20 > > > > > > =20 > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Miqu=C3=A8l > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/net/mac802154/rx.c > > > > > > > +++ b/net/mac802154/rx.c > > > > > > > @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ __ieee802154_rx_handle_packet(struct ieee= 802154_local *local, > > > > > > > int ret; > > > > > > > struct ieee802154_sub_if_data *sdata; > > > > > > > struct ieee802154_hdr hdr; > > > > > > > + bool iface_found =3D false; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ret =3D ieee802154_parse_frame_start(skb, &hdr); > > > > > > > if (ret) { > > > > > > > @@ -203,18 +204,31 @@ __ieee802154_rx_handle_packet(struct ie= ee802154_local *local, > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdata, &local->interfaces, li= st) { > > > > > > > - if (sdata->wpan_dev.iftype !=3D NL802154_IFTY= PE_NODE) > > > > > > > + if (sdata->wpan_dev.iftype =3D=3D NL802154_IF= TYPE_MONITOR) > > > > > > > continue; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > if (!ieee802154_sdata_running(sdata)) > > > > > > > continue; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + iface_found =3D true; > > > > > > > + break; > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + if (!iface_found) { > > > > > > > + kfree_skb(skb); > > > > > > > + return; > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + /* TBD: Additional filtering is possible on NODEs and= /or COORDINATORs */ > > > > > > > + switch (sdata->wpan_dev.iftype) { > > > > > > > + case NL802154_IFTYPE_COORD: > > > > > > > + case NL802154_IFTYPE_NODE: > > > > > > > ieee802154_subif_frame(sdata, skb, &hdr); > > > > > > > - skb =3D NULL; > > > > > > > + break; > > > > > > > + default: > > > > > > > + kfree_skb(skb); > > > > > > > break; > > > > > > > } =20 > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you remove the whole interface looping above and make it= only > > > > > > run for one ?first found? ? =20 > > > > > > > > > > To reduce the indentation level. > > > > > =20 > > > > > > That code changes this behaviour and I do > > > > > > not know why. =20 > > > > > > > > > > The precedent code did: > > > > > for_each_iface() { > > > > > if (not a node) > > > > > continue; > > > > > if (not running) > > > > > continue; > > > > > > > > > > subif_frame(); > > > > > break; > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > That final break also elected only the first running node iface. > > > > > Otherwise it would mean that we allow the same skb to be consumed > > > > > twice, which is wrong IMHO? =20 > > > > > > > > no? Why is that wrong? There is a real use-case to have multiple > > > > interfaces on one phy (or to do it in near future, I said that > > > > multiple times). This patch does a step backwards to this. =20 > > > > > > So we need to duplicate the skb because it automatically gets freed in > > > the "forward to upper layer" path. Am I right? I'm fine doing so if = =20 > > > > What is the definition of "duplicate the skb" here. > > =20 > > > this is the way to go, but I am interested if you can give me a real > > > use case where having NODE+COORDINATOR on the same PHY is useful? > > > =20 > > > > Testing. =20 >=20 > I need to say that I really used multiple monitors at the same time on > one phy only and I did that with hwsim to run multiple user space > stacks. It was working and I was happy and didn't need to do a lot of > phy creations in hwsim. Indeed, looking at the code, you could use as many MONITOR interfaces you needed, but only a single NODE. I've changed that to use as many NODE and COORD that we wish. > Most hardware can probably not run multiple > nodes and coordinators at the same time ?yet?, _but_ there is a > candidate which can do that and this is atusb. On atusb we have a > co-processor that can deal with multiple address filters. People > already asked to do something like a node which can operate on two > pans as I remember, that would be a candidate for such a feature. Oh nice! Yes this makes sense. > I > really don't want to move step backwards here and delete this thing > which probably can be useful later. I don't know how wireless history > dealt with it and how complicated it was to bring such a feature in to > e.g. run multiple access points on one phy. I also see it in ethernet > with macvlan, which is a similar feature. >=20 > We don't need to support it, make it so that on an ifup it returns > -EBUSY if something doesn't fit together as it currently is. We can > later add support for it after playing around with hwsim a little bit > more. We should at least take care that I can still run my multiple > monitors at the same time (which is currently allowed). >=20 > - Alex >=20 Thanks, Miqu=C3=A8l