netdev - Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v7 6/8] xfrm: speed-up lookup of HW policies

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:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 11:36:19 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v7 6/8] xfrm: speed-up lookup of HW policies

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 09:37:20AM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:57:43PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 02:10:02PM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 03:01:42PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 01:43:49PM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 02:02:52PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > If policy and state do not match here, this means the lookup
> > > > > returned the wrong state. The correct state might still sit
> > > > > in the database. At this point, you should either have found
> > > > > a matching state, or no state at all.
> > > > 
> > > > I check for "x" because of "x = NULL" above.
> > > 
> > > This does not change the fact that the lookup returned the wrong state.
> > 
> > Steffen, but this is exactly why we added this check - to catch wrong
> > states and configurations. 
> 
> No, you have to adjust the lookup so that this can't happen.
> This is not a missconfiguration, The lookup found the wrong
> SA, this is a difference.
> 
> Use the offload type and dev as a lookup key and don't consider
> SAs that don't match this in the lookup.
> 
> This is really not too hard to do. The thing that could be a bit
> more difficult is that the lookup should be only adjusted when
> we really have HW policies installed. Otherwise this affects
> even systems that don't use this kind of offload.

Thanks for an explanation, trying it now.