[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100901165743.GB17843@stratus.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 12:57:43 -0400
From: Bandan Das <bandan.das@...atus.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>
Cc: bunk@...nel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Bandan Das <bandan.das@...atus.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
NetDev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net/ipv4: push IP options to CB in
ip_fragment
On 0, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:17:51AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> > Once again, the IP stack -> bridge -> IP stack flow bites us,
> > because bridge likes to dirty IPCB.
>
> OK, so we're talking about a locally transmitted packet, with
> IP options leaving the IP stack, entering bridging, and then
> reentering the IP stack?
>
> In that case the packet should no longer be treated as an IP
> packet when it enters the bridge. So if it did have options
> and we want to support that in bridging then we need to parse
> IP options there as my comment suggested.
Ok. So, I am not sure if re-exporting ip_compile_options is a
good idea nor am I sure if replicating its behavior in a different
function is. It was removed from the list of exported symbols way
back in 2005.
commit 0742fd53a3774781255bd1e471e7aa2e4a82d5f7
Author: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Date: Tue Aug 9 19:35:47 2005 -0700
[IPV4]: possible cleanups
This patch contains the following possible cleanups:
- make needlessly global code static
- #if 0 the following unused global function:
- xfrm4_state.c: xfrm4_state_fini
- remove the following unneeded EXPORT_SYMBOL's:
- ip_output.c: ip_finish_output
- ip_output.c: sysctl_ip_default_ttl
- fib_frontend.c: ip_dev_find
- inetpeer.c: inet_peer_idlock
- ip_options.c: ip_options_compile
- ip_options.c: ip_options_undo
- net/core/request_sock.c: sysctl_max_syn_backlog
But, nevertheless, I moved the call to ip_options_compile to
br_nf_dev_queue_xmit(). Does something like this look ok ?
(Previously sent patch : http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg1077537.html)
diff --git a/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c b/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c
index 2c911c0..de44271 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c
@@ -759,9 +759,21 @@ static unsigned int br_nf_forward_arp(unsigned int hook, struct sk_buff *skb,
#if defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_IPV4) || defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_IPV4_MODULE)
static int br_nf_dev_queue_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb)
{
+ struct ip_options *opt;
+ struct iphdr *iph;
+ struct net_device *dev = skb->dev;
+
if (skb->nfct != NULL && skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP) &&
skb->len + nf_bridge_mtu_reduction(skb) > skb->dev->mtu &&
- !skb_is_gso(skb))
+ !skb_is_gso(skb)) {
+ iph = ip_hdr(skb);
+ opt = &(IPCB(skb)->opt);
+ opt->optlen = iph->ihl*4 - sizeof(struct iphdr);
+ if (ip_options_compile(dev_net(dev), opt, skb)){
+ IP_INC_STATS(dev_net(dev), IPSTATS_MIB_INHDRERRORS);
+ memset(IPCB(skb), 0, sizeof(struct inet_skb_parm));
+ }
+ }
return ip_fragment(skb, br_dev_queue_push_xmit);
else
return br_dev_queue_push_xmit(skb);
diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_options.c b/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
index ba9836c..72fe82c 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
@@ -466,7 +466,7 @@ error:
}
return -EINVAL;
}
-
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(ip_options_compile);
/*
* Undo all the changes done by ip_options_compile().
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists