netdev - Re: [patch net-next-2.6 6/8] bonding: move processing of recv handlers into handle

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 6 Mar 2011 14:34:13 +0100
From:	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
To:	Nicolas de Pesloüan 
	<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, kaber@...sh.net, fubar@...ibm.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [patch net-next-2.6 6/8] bonding: move processing of recv
 handlers into handle_frame()

Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 01:24:32PM CET, nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com wrote:
>Le 05/03/2011 15:50, Nicolas de Pesloüan a écrit :
>>Le 05/03/2011 15:43, Jiri Pirko a écrit :
>>>Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 03:33:30PM CET, nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com wrote:
>>>>Le 05/03/2011 11:29, Jiri Pirko a écrit :
>>>>>Since now when bonding uses rx_handler, all traffic going into bond
>>>>>device goes thru bond_handle_frame. So there's no need to go back into
>>>>>bonding code later via ptype handlers. This patch converts
>>>>>original ptype handlers into "bonding receive probes". These functions
>>>>>are called from bond_handle_frame and they are registered per-mode.
>>>>
>>>>Does this still support having the arp_ip_target on a vlan?
>>>>
>>>>(eth0 -> bond0 -> bond0.100, with arp_ip_target only reachable
>>>>through bond0.100).
>>>
>>>This case is still covered with vlan_on_bond_hook
>>>eth0->
>>>bond_handle_frame
>>>bond0->
>>>vlan_hwaccel_do_receive
>>>bond0.5->
>>>vlan_on_bond_hook -> reinject into bond0
>>>-> bond_handle_frame (here it is processed)
>>
>>Sound good to me.
>>
>>Reviewed-by: Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@...e.fr>
>
>After another review, I think it won't work.
>
>vlan_on_bond() will reinject into bond0, but bond_handle_frame() is
>registered as the rx_handler for the slaves (eth0 in the above
>setup), not as the rx_handler for the master (bond0 in the above
>setup). So, bond_handlee_frame() will never see the untagged ARP
>request/reply and bonding ARP monitoring will fail.

Damn, you are right. I mislooked.

>
>That being said, the current vlan_on_bond_hook() hack already suffer
>other troubles and for example won't support the following setup:
>
>eth0 -> bond0 -> br0 -> br0.100.

blah. Well correct me if my thinking is wrong but I cannot imagine
a scenario where there's not other way how to do arp monitoring than
over vlan.

So how about to just remove the vlan_on_bond_hook and forbid the
possibility. IMHO it should have never been introduced in the first
place.

>
>I think we need to fix this stacking issue in a more general way.

Well this issue is more or less out of the concept and breaks layering.
I cannot think of how to resolve this nicely atm.

>
>	Nicolas.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html