On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 01:14:51PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote: > On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 09:43 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:51:12PM +0300, Arseny Maslennikov wrote: > > > Some tools may currently be using only the deprecated attribute; > > > let's print an elaborate and clear deprecation notice to kmsg. > > > > > > To do that, we have to replace the whole sysfs file, since we inherit > > > the original one from netdev. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arseny Maslennikov <ar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_main.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_main.c b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_main.c > > > index 30f840f874b3..74732726ec6f 100644 > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/ipoib/ipoib_main.c > > > @@ -2386,6 +2386,35 @@ int ipoib_add_pkey_attr(struct net_device *dev) > > > return device_create_file(&dev->dev, &dev_attr_pkey); > > > } > > > > > > +/* > > > + * We erroneously exposed the iface's port number in the dev_id > > > + * sysfs field long after dev_port was introduced for that purpose[1], > > > + * and we need to stop everyone from relying on that. > > > + * Let's overload the shower routine for the dev_id file here > > > + * to gently bring the issue up. > > > + * > > > + * [1] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg272123.html > > > + */ > > > +static ssize_t dev_id_show(struct device *dev, > > > + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) > > > +{ > > > + struct net_device *ndev = to_net_dev(dev); > > > + > > > + if (ndev->dev_id == ndev->dev_port) > > > + netdev_info_once(ndev, > > > + "\"%s\" wants to know my dev_id. Should it look at dev_port instead? See Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net for more info.\n", > > > + current->comm); > > > + > > > + return sprintf(buf, "%#x\n", ndev->dev_id); > > > +} > > > +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(dev_id); > > > + > > > +int ipoib_intercept_dev_id_attr(struct net_device *dev) > > > +{ > > > + device_remove_file(&dev->dev, &dev_attr_dev_id); > > > + return device_create_file(&dev->dev, &dev_attr_dev_id); > > > +} > > > > Isn't this racey with userspace? Ie what happens if udev is querying > > the dev_id right here? > > > > Do we know there is no userspace doing this? > > I don't think that it can race (or reasonably can). The intercept > function is done as part of ipoib_add_port() so the port itself isn't > live yet. The above code is after register_netdev, so the port itself is certainly live as far as userspace is concerned.. All the other sysfs stuff in add_port is already wrong/racy.. See Parav's recent series fixing this for the main devices.. Jason
