netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/openvswitch: Remove the skb encapsulation mark after decapsulation

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:	Wed, 22 Jan 2014 20:49:52 +0200
From:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>,
	Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>
Cc:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/openvswitch: Remove the skb encapsulation mark after decapsulation

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com> wrote:
>>>> We must unset the skb encapsulation mark before injecting the
>>>> decapsulated packet into ovs for the rest of its journey.
>>>>
>>>> This follows the practice set by 0afb166 "vxlan: Add capability of Rx
>>>> checksum offload for inner packet" and the overall idea behind the
>>>> skb encapsulation field.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>
>>>> Cc: Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
>>>
>>> This should be in the common decapsulation code. It doesn't make sense
>>> to do this here when we set the layer pointers, encap bit, etc. in
>>> common code on transmit.
>>
>> well that's a bit problematic, since the code in the vxlan driver vxlan_rcv()
>> which has the potential to be common refers to vxlan->dev-> which is
>> irrelevant for ovs, thoughts?
>
> Well, as I said before, I don't really see the value in the
> NETIF_F_RXCSUM flag on a VXLAN device

I am OK with that too, Joseph?

> but in any case you could break that if statement in half and
> move the part that doesn't refer to vxlan->dev into common code.

So if Joseph is OK with the above I'll just remove the check and move
the code to common  code and if not, I'll have most of it common and
this one separately, good, we have a plan.
--
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