netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 14:08:00 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To:     John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

On Mon,  5 Mar 2018 13:28:28 +0000, John Hurley wrote:
> The linux bond itself registers a cb for offloading tc rules. Potential
> slave netdevs on offload devices can then register with the bond for a
> further callback - this code is basically the same as registering for an
> egress dev offload in TC. Then when a rule is offloaded to the bond, it
> can be relayed to each netdev that has registered with the bond code and
> which is a slave of the given bond.

As you know I would much rather see this handled in the TC core,
similarly to how blocks are shared.  We can add a new .ndo_setup_tc
notification like TC_MASTER_BLOCK_BIND and reuse the existing offload
tracking.  It would also fix the problem of freezing the bond and allow
better code reuse with team etc.

For tunnel offloads we necessarily have to stick to the weak offload
model, where any offload success satisfies skip_sw, but in case of
bonds we should strive for the strong model (as you are doing AFAICT).

The only difficulty seems to be replaying the bind commands when port
joins?  I mean finding all blocks on a bond.  But that should be
surmountable..