| .. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause |
| |
| ================================================================= |
| Netlink specification support for legacy Generic Netlink families |
| ================================================================= |
| |
| This document describes the many additional quirks and properties |
| required to describe older Generic Netlink families which form |
| the ``genetlink-legacy`` protocol level. |
| |
| Specification |
| ============= |
| |
| Globals |
| ------- |
| |
| Attributes listed directly at the root level of the spec file. |
| |
| version |
| ~~~~~~~ |
| |
| Generic Netlink family version, default is 1. |
| |
| ``version`` has historically been used to introduce family changes |
| which may break backwards compatibility. Since compatibility breaking changes |
| are generally not allowed ``version`` is very rarely used. |
| |
| Attribute type nests |
| -------------------- |
| |
| New Netlink families should use ``multi-attr`` to define arrays. |
| Older families (e.g. ``genetlink`` control family) attempted to |
| define array types reusing attribute type to carry information. |
| |
| For reference the ``multi-attr`` array may look like this:: |
| |
| [ARRAY-ATTR] |
| [INDEX (optionally)] |
| [MEMBER1] |
| [MEMBER2] |
| [SOME-OTHER-ATTR] |
| [ARRAY-ATTR] |
| [INDEX (optionally)] |
| [MEMBER1] |
| [MEMBER2] |
| |
| where ``ARRAY-ATTR`` is the array entry type. |
| |
| indexed-array |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| ``indexed-array`` wraps the entire array in an extra attribute (hence |
| limiting its size to 64kB). The ``ENTRY`` nests are special and have the |
| index of the entry as their type instead of normal attribute type. |
| |
| A ``sub-type`` is needed to describe what type in the ``ENTRY``. A ``nest`` |
| ``sub-type`` means there are nest arrays in the ``ENTRY``, with the structure |
| looks like:: |
| |
| [SOME-OTHER-ATTR] |
| [ARRAY-ATTR] |
| [ENTRY] |
| [MEMBER1] |
| [MEMBER2] |
| [ENTRY] |
| [MEMBER1] |
| [MEMBER2] |
| |
| Other ``sub-type`` like ``u32`` means there is only one member as described |
| in ``sub-type`` in the ``ENTRY``. The structure looks like:: |
| |
| [SOME-OTHER-ATTR] |
| [ARRAY-ATTR] |
| [ENTRY u32] |
| [ENTRY u32] |
| |
| type-value |
| ~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| ``type-value`` is a construct which uses attribute types to carry |
| information about a single object (often used when array is dumped |
| entry-by-entry). |
| |
| ``type-value`` can have multiple levels of nesting, for example |
| genetlink's policy dumps create the following structures:: |
| |
| [POLICY-IDX] |
| [ATTR-IDX] |
| [POLICY-INFO-ATTR1] |
| [POLICY-INFO-ATTR2] |
| |
| Where the first level of nest has the policy index as it's attribute |
| type, it contains a single nest which has the attribute index as its |
| type. Inside the attr-index nest are the policy attributes. Modern |
| Netlink families should have instead defined this as a flat structure, |
| the nesting serves no good purpose here. |
| |
| Operations |
| ========== |
| |
| Enum (message ID) model |
| ----------------------- |
| |
| unified |
| ~~~~~~~ |
| |
| Modern families use the ``unified`` message ID model, which uses |
| a single enumeration for all messages within family. Requests and |
| responses share the same message ID. Notifications have separate |
| IDs from the same space. For example given the following list |
| of operations: |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| - |
| name: a |
| value: 1 |
| do: ... |
| - |
| name: b |
| do: ... |
| - |
| name: c |
| value: 4 |
| notify: a |
| - |
| name: d |
| do: ... |
| |
| Requests and responses for operation ``a`` will have the ID of 1, |
| the requests and responses of ``b`` - 2 (since there is no explicit |
| ``value`` it's previous operation ``+ 1``). Notification ``c`` will |
| use the ID of 4, operation ``d`` 5 etc. |
| |
| directional |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| The ``directional`` model splits the ID assignment by the direction of |
| the message. Messages from and to the kernel can't be confused with |
| each other so this conserves the ID space (at the cost of making |
| the programming more cumbersome). |
| |
| In this case ``value`` attribute should be specified in the ``request`` |
| ``reply`` sections of the operations (if an operation has both ``do`` |
| and ``dump`` the IDs are shared, ``value`` should be set in ``do``). |
| For notifications the ``value`` is provided at the op level but it |
| only allocates a ``reply`` (i.e. a "from-kernel" ID). Let's look |
| at an example: |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| - |
| name: a |
| do: |
| request: |
| value: 2 |
| attributes: ... |
| reply: |
| value: 1 |
| attributes: ... |
| - |
| name: b |
| notify: a |
| - |
| name: c |
| notify: a |
| value: 7 |
| - |
| name: d |
| do: ... |
| |
| In this case ``a`` will use 2 when sending the message to the kernel |
| and expects message with ID 1 in response. Notification ``b`` allocates |
| a "from-kernel" ID which is 2. ``c`` allocates "from-kernel" ID of 7. |
| If operation ``d`` does not set ``values`` explicitly in the spec |
| it will be allocated 3 for the request (``a`` is the previous operation |
| with a request section and the value of 2) and 8 for response (``c`` is |
| the previous operation in the "from-kernel" direction). |
| |
| Other quirks |
| ============ |
| |
| Structures |
| ---------- |
| |
| Legacy families can define C structures both to be used as the contents of |
| an attribute and as a fixed message header. Structures are defined in |
| ``definitions`` and referenced in operations or attributes. |
| |
| members |
| ~~~~~~~ |
| |
| - ``name`` - The attribute name of the struct member |
| - ``type`` - One of the scalar types ``u8``, ``u16``, ``u32``, ``u64``, ``s8``, |
| ``s16``, ``s32``, ``s64``, ``string``, ``binary`` or ``bitfield32``. |
| - ``byte-order`` - ``big-endian`` or ``little-endian`` |
| - ``doc``, ``enum``, ``enum-as-flags``, ``display-hint`` - Same as for |
| :ref:`attribute definitions <attribute_properties>` |
| |
| Note that structures defined in YAML are implicitly packed according to C |
| conventions. For example, the following struct is 4 bytes, not 6 bytes: |
| |
| .. code-block:: c |
| |
| struct { |
| u8 a; |
| u16 b; |
| u8 c; |
| } |
| |
| Any padding must be explicitly added and C-like languages should infer the |
| need for explicit padding from whether the members are naturally aligned. |
| |
| Here is the struct definition from above, declared in YAML: |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| definitions: |
| - |
| name: message-header |
| type: struct |
| members: |
| - |
| name: a |
| type: u8 |
| - |
| name: b |
| type: u16 |
| - |
| name: c |
| type: u8 |
| |
| Fixed Headers |
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| Fixed message headers can be added to operations using ``fixed-header``. |
| The default ``fixed-header`` can be set in ``operations`` and it can be set |
| or overridden for each operation. |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| operations: |
| fixed-header: message-header |
| list: |
| - |
| name: get |
| fixed-header: custom-header |
| attribute-set: message-attrs |
| |
| Attributes |
| ~~~~~~~~~~ |
| |
| A ``binary`` attribute can be interpreted as a C structure using a |
| ``struct`` property with the name of the structure definition. The |
| ``struct`` property implies ``sub-type: struct`` so it is not necessary to |
| specify a sub-type. |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| attribute-sets: |
| - |
| name: stats-attrs |
| attributes: |
| - |
| name: stats |
| type: binary |
| struct: vport-stats |
| |
| C Arrays |
| -------- |
| |
| Legacy families also use ``binary`` attributes to encapsulate C arrays. The |
| ``sub-type`` is used to identify the type of scalar to extract. |
| |
| .. code-block:: yaml |
| |
| attributes: |
| - |
| name: ports |
| type: binary |
| sub-type: u32 |
| |
| Multi-message DO |
| ---------------- |
| |
| New Netlink families should never respond to a DO operation with multiple |
| replies, with ``NLM_F_MULTI`` set. Use a filtered dump instead. |
| |
| At the spec level we can define a ``dumps`` property for the ``do``, |
| perhaps with values of ``combine`` and ``multi-object`` depending |
| on how the parsing should be implemented (parse into a single reply |
| vs list of objects i.e. pretty much a dump). |