linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net/mlx5e: Prevent entering switchdev mode with inconsistent netns

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]

Message-ID: <20250910174842.6c82fb0c@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 17:48:42 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Saeed Mahameed
 <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, "Mark Bloch"
 <mbloch@...dia.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Gal Pressman
 <gal@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net/mlx5e: Prevent entering switchdev mode with
 inconsistent netns

On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:01:18 +0800 Jianbo Liu wrote:
> On 9/10/2025 9:23 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Sep 2025 13:07:05 +0300 Tariq Toukan wrote:  
> >> If the PF's netns has been moved and differs from the devlink's netns,
> >> enabling switchdev mode would create an invalid state where
> >> representors and PF exist in different namespaces.
> >>
> >> To prevent this inconsistent configuration,  
> > 
> > Could you explain clearly what is the problem with having different
> > netdevs in different namespaces? From networking perspective it really
> > doesn't matter.  
> 
> There is a requirement from customer who wants to manage openvswitch in 
> a container. But he can't complete the steps (changing eswitch and 
> configuring OVS) in the container if the netns are different.

You're preventing a configuration which you think is "bad" (for a
reason unknown). How is _rejecting_ a config enabling you to fulfill
some "customer requirement" which sounds like having all interfaces 
in a separate ns?

> Besides, ibdev is dependent on netdev, there is refcnt issue if netdev 
> is moved to other netns but devlink netns is not changed by "devlink dev 
> reload netns" command.

shrug