linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] net: dsa: introduce bridge notifier

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]

Message-ID: <20170204175517.GC8364@lunn.ch>
Date:   Sat, 4 Feb 2017 18:55:17 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...oirfairelinux.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, cphealy@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] net: dsa: introduce bridge notifier

> +#define DSA_NOTIFIER_BRIDGE_JOIN		1
> +#define DSA_NOTIFIER_BRIDGE_LEAVE		2

Hi Vivien

Is one notifier per event sufficient?

I've not looked at what actually needs to happen when a port joins a
bridge, in a D in DSA setup. Do we need to both enable the flow of
frames around the switch fabric, but also block those frames going out
ports they should not? Do we need a first notifier to put in place
the blocks, and then a second notifier to enable the flow of packets?

What we don't want is a window of time during the fabric setup as a
whole is inconsistent, and frames a leaking out ports they should not.

      Andrew