On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:01:49 -0800 Kees Cook wrote:
> So, I found several cases where struct net_device is included in the
> middle of another structure, which makes my proposal more awkward. But I
> also don't understand why it's in the _middle_. Shouldn't it always be
> at the beginning (with priv stuff following it?)
> Quick search and examined manually: git grep 'struct net_device [a-z0-9_]*;'
>
> struct rtw89_dev
> struct ath10k
> etc.
Ugh, yes, the (ab)use of NAPI.
> Some even have two included (?)
And some seem to be cargo-culted from out-of-tree code and are unused :S
> But I still like the idea -- Gustavo has been solving these cases with
> having two structs, e.g.:
>
> struct net_device {
> ...unchanged...
> };
>
> struct net_device_alloc {
> struct net_device dev;
> u32 priv_size;
> u8 priv_data[] __counted_by(priv_size) __aligned(NETDEV_ALIGN);
> };
>
> And internals can use struct net_device_alloc...
That's... less pretty. I'd rather push the ugly into the questionable
users. Make them either allocate the netdev dynamically and store
a pointer, or move the netdev to the end of the struct.
But yeah, that's a bit of a cleanup :(
