netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2] switchdev: don't abort hardware ipv4 fib offload on failure to program fib entry in hardware

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:	Mon, 18 May 2015 16:19:16 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Cc:	sfeldma@...il.com, john.fastabend@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] switchdev: don't abort hardware ipv4 fib
 offload on failure to program fib entry in hardware

From: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 16:42:05 -0700

> On most systems where you can offload routes to hardware,
> doing routing in software is not an option (the cpu limitations
> make routing impossible in software).

You absolutely do not get to determine this policy, none of us
do.

What matters is that by default the damn switch device being there
is %100 transparent to the user.

And the way to achieve that default is to do software routes as
a fallback.

I am not going to entertain changes of this nature which fail
route loading by default just because we've exceeded a device's
HW capacity to offload.

I thought I was _really_ clear about this at netdev 0.1
--
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