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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14EBAC433E1 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 10:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED9852074F for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 10:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727789AbgG0KUu (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 06:20:50 -0400 Received: from correo.us.es ([193.147.175.20]:51696 "EHLO mail.us.es" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726139AbgG0KUu (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 06:20:50 -0400 Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (unknown [192.168.2.11]) by mail.us.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66794F259A for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF0ADA54D for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix, from userid 99) id 0796DDA91D; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from antivirus1-rhel7.int (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F69CBAAC7; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 192.168.1.97 (192.168.1.97) by antivirus1-rhel7.int (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:16 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/550/antivirus1-rhel7.int) Received: from us.es (unknown [90.77.255.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: 1984lsi) by entrada.int (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6963E42EF4E1; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:20:16 +0200 X-SMTPAUTHUS: auth mail.us.es From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Phil Sutter , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [iptables PATCH 00/18] nft: Sorted chain listing et al. Message-ID: <20200727102016.GA5823@salvia> References: <20200711101831.29506-1-phil@nwl.cc> <20200723122257.GA22824@salvia> <20200725115541.GA13697@orbyte.nwl.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200725115541.GA13697@orbyte.nwl.cc> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Hi Phil, On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 01:55:41PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > Hi Pablo, > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 02:22:57PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 12:18:13PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > > > Work in this series centered around Harald's complaint about seemingly > > > random custom chain ordering in iptables-nft-save output. nftables > > > returns chains in the order they were created which differs from > > > legacy iptables which sorts by name. > > > > > > The intuitive approach of simply sorting chains in tables' > > > nftnl_chain_lists is problematic since base chains, which shall be > > > dumped first, are contained in there as well. Patch 15 solves this by > > > introducing a per-table array of nftnl_chain pointers to hold only base > > > chains (the hook values determine the array index). The old > > > nftnl_chain_list now contains merely non-base chains and is sorted upon > > > population by the new nftnl_chain_list_add_sorted() function. > > > > > > Having dedicated slots for base chains allows for another neat trick, > > > namely to create only immediately required base chains. Apart from the > > > obvious case, where adding a rule to OUTPUT chain doesn't cause creation > > > of INPUT or FORWARD chains, this means ruleset modifications can be > > > avoided completely when listing, flushing or zeroing counters (unless > > > chains exist). > > > > Patches from 1 to 7, they look good to me. Would it be possible to > > apply these patches independently from this batch or they are a strong > > dependency? > > I just pushed them after making sure they don't break any of the > testsuites. Fingers crossed I didn't miss a detail which breaks without > the other patches. :) Good. > > I think it's better if we go slightly different direction? > > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netfilter-devel/patch/20200723121553.7400-1-pablo@netfilter.org/ > > That's interesting. At least it would allow us to reorganize the > cache-related data structures, e.g. move the nft_cache->table array > items into nft_cache->table items. > > > Instead of adding more functions into libnftnl for specific list > > handling, which are not used by nft, use linux list native handling. > > OK. > > > I think there is not need to cache the full nftnl_table object, > > probably it should be even possible to just use it to collect the > > attributes from the kernel to populate the nft_table object that I'm > > proposing. > > Yes, for iptables-nft at least we should be completely fine with table > name alone. Good. > > IIRC embedded people complained on the size of libnftnl, going this > > direction I suggest, we can probably deprecated iterators for a number > > of objects and get it slimmer in the midrun. > > OK. I'll keep that in mind. > > So I'll rework my changes based on your nft_table idea and introduce an > nft_chain struct to be organized in a standard list_head list. This will > allow me to perform the sorting in iptables-nft itself. Good. > Should I base this onto your nft_table patch (and exploit it a bit > further) or keep them separate for now? I'll push it out so you can rebase on top, OK? Thanks.