netdev - Re: [net-next 02/10] udp: Expand UDP tunnel common APIs

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 22 Jul 2014 14:02:36 -0700
From:	Andy Zhou <azhou@...ira.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next 02/10] udp: Expand UDP tunnel common APIs

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:19 AM, Andy Zhou <azhou@...ira.com> wrote:
>> Added create_udp_tunnel_socket(), packet receive and transmit,  and
>> other related common functions for UDP tunnels.
>>
>> Per net open UDP tunnel ports are tracked in this common layer to
>> prevent sharing of a single port with more than one UDP tunnel.
>>
> bind should already prevent this. I don't really see a need to track udp
> encap ports separately.

When a new network device driver is activated, does it need to get a list
of currently open UDP tunnel ports to configure its offloads?

>> --- a/include/net/udp_tunnel.h
>> +++ b/include/net/udp_tunnel.h
>> @@ -1,7 +1,10 @@
>>  #ifndef __NET_UDP_TUNNEL_H
>>  #define __NET_UDP_TUNNEL_H
>>
>> -#define UDP_TUNNEL_TYPE_VXLAN 0x01
>> +#include <net/ip_tunnels.h>
>> +
>> +#define UDP_TUNNEL_TYPE_VXLAN  0x01
>> +#define UDP_TUNNEL_TYPE_GENEVE 0x02
>>
> Why do we need to define these? Caller should know what type of port is
> being opened and provide appropriate encap_rcv.

Assume udp tunnel layer needs to keep track of open ports, should it
also keep track of the protocol associated with the port?

>> +
>> +/* Calls the ndo_add_tunnel_port of the caller in order to
>> + * supply the listening VXLAN udp ports. Callers are expected
>> + * to implement the ndo_add_tunnle_port.
>> + */
> Seems a little presumptuous that we're doing VXLAN specific things in what
> should be common and generic code...
>
You are right. Cut-and-past error. It should read "UDP tunnel ports"
instead. I will fix it.
--
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