netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] bridge: Add a flag to control unicast packet flood.

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:	Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:43:50 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	mst@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] bridge: Add a flag to control unicast
 packet flood.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:35:45 -0400
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com> wrote:

> Add a flag to control flood of unicast traffic.  By default, flood is
> on and the bridge will flood unicast traffic if it doesn't know
> the destination.  When the flag is turned off, unicast traffic
> without an FDB will not be forwarded to the specified port.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@...hat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> 

This a good idea and thank you for doing it. I like that the flag is expressed
as a positive value (rather than an inverse value like no-flood).

The name BR_UNICAST_FLOOD is too long, just use BR_FLOOD and keep the code
shorter.

This doesn't apply against current net-next (same problem as first patch).

Also, I am not a fan of having lots of boolean flag variables in normal
code paths. It ends up reading like PASCAL code. But probably unavoidable in this case.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html