From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <l.wagner@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5A9993CAB
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:21:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AF2EF644
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:20:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:20:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6D4F34247E
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:20:42 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <8629d8b1-cdc7-49bf-98c2-5e3c03729d44@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 16:20:41 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
References: <20240402171629.536804-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
<20240402171629.536804-7-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: de-AT, en-US
From: Lukas Wagner <l.wagner@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240402171629.536804-7-s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.006 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [lib.rs, mod.rs, utils.rs]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-firewall 06/37] config: host: add
helpers for host network configuration
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2024 14:21:13 -0000
On 2024-04-02 19:15, Stefan Hanreich wrote:
> Currently the helpers for obtaining the host network configuration
> panic on error, which could be avoided by the use of
> OnceLock::get_or_init, but this method is currently only available in
> nightly versions.
>
> Generally, if there is a problem with obtaining a hostname for the
> current node then something else is probably already quite broken, so
> I would deem it acceptable for now, same goes for obtaining the
> current network configuration.
>
> Co-authored-by: Wolfgang Bumiller <w.bumiller@proxmox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hanreich <s.hanreich@proxmox.com>
> ---
> proxmox-ve-config/Cargo.toml | 1 +
> proxmox-ve-config/src/host/mod.rs | 1 +
> proxmox-ve-config/src/host/utils.rs | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> proxmox-ve-config/src/lib.rs | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 100 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 proxmox-ve-config/src/host/mod.rs
> create mode 100644 proxmox-ve-config/src/host/utils.rs
>
> diff --git a/proxmox-ve-config/Cargo.toml b/proxmox-ve-config/Cargo.toml
> index 7bb391e..480eb58 100644
> --- a/proxmox-ve-config/Cargo.toml
> +++ b/proxmox-ve-config/Cargo.toml
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ license = "AGPL-3"
> [dependencies]
> log = "0.4"
> anyhow = "1"
> +nix = "0.26"
>
> serde = { version = "1", features = [ "derive" ] }
> serde_json = "1"
> diff --git a/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/mod.rs b/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/mod.rs
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..b5614dd
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/mod.rs
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +pub mod utils;
> diff --git a/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/utils.rs b/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/utils.rs
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..1636f95
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/proxmox-ve-config/src/host/utils.rs
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +use std::net::{IpAddr, ToSocketAddrs};
> +use std::sync::OnceLock;
> +
> +use crate::firewall::types::Cidr;
> +
> +use nix::sys::socket::{AddressFamily, SockaddrLike};
> +
> +pub fn hostname() -> &'static str {
> + static HOSTNAME: OnceLock<String> = OnceLock::new();
> +
> + // We should rather use get_or_try_init to avoid needing to panic
> + // but it is currently experimental
> + HOSTNAME.get_or_init(|| {
> + use nix::libc::{c_char, gethostname, sysconf, _SC_HOST_NAME_MAX};
> + use std::ffi::CStr;
> +
> + let max_len = unsafe { sysconf(_SC_HOST_NAME_MAX) } as usize + 1;
> + let mut buffer = vec![0; max_len];
> +
> + let ret = unsafe { gethostname(buffer.as_mut_ptr() as *mut c_char, buffer.len()) };
> +
> + if ret != 0 {
> + // failing to get the hostname means something is *really* off
> + panic!("gethostname failed with returncode {ret}");
> + }
> +
> + let c_str = CStr::from_bytes_until_nul(&buffer).expect("buffer contains a NUL byte");
> +
> + String::from_utf8_lossy(c_str.to_bytes()).to_string()
> + })
> +}
^
FYI: There is proxmox_sys::nodename() already, which also does caching. Unless I'm missing something
you could just use that instead of re-implementing it?
It uses `uname` from the nix-crate, not sure if there any differences to using `gethostname` (but
I don't think so).
--
- Lukas