linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 6/9] net: dsa: mv88e6352: allow egress of unknown multicast

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1620255467.632143.1433889721300.JavaMail.zimbra@savoirfairelinux.com>
Date:	Tue, 9 Jun 2015 18:42:01 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, David <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Jérome Oufella 
	<jerome.oufella@...oirfairelinux.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel <kernel@...oirfairelinux.com>,
	Chris Healy <cphealy@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 6/9] net: dsa: mv88e6352: allow egress of unknown
 multicast

Hi Guenter,

On Jun 2, 2015, at 9:52 PM, Vivien Didelot vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2015, at 10:20 AM, Guenter Roeck linux@...ck-us.net wrote:
>> On 06/01/2015 06:27 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>>> This patch disables egress of unknown unicast destination addresses.
>>>
>> 
>> Hi Vivien,
>> 
>> seems to me this patch is unrelated to the rest of the series.
>> 
>> Not sure if we really want this. If an address is in the arp cache
>> but has timed out from the bridge database, any unicast to that address
>> will no longer be sent. If the bridge database has been flushed for some
>> reason, such as a spanning tree reconfiguration, we'll have a hard time
>> to send anything.
>> 
>> What is the problem you are trying to solve with this patch ?
> 
> TBH, I don't remember which one of the test cases I described in 0/9
> this patch was solving... Some ARP request didn't propagate correctly
> without this, IIRC.
> 
> I'll try to revert the change and do my tests again in order to isolate
> the problem.

Indeed, it seems like this patch is not necessary. I removed it and I
was still able to ping a tagged and untagged port from an untagged one.

I will remove it from this serie.

Thanks,
-v
--
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/