netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/6] vxlan: Group Policy extension

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: <CAEP_g=-QiYG8P7ZaZ54rA72tk2W=t44Wrvz3ju8UFccNgAY4iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:19:27 -0800
From:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
	"dev@...nvswitch.org" <dev@...nvswitch.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] vxlan: Group Policy extension

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
> On 01/12/15 at 02:50pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
>> > On 01/12/15 at 11:23am, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch> wrote:
>> >> > diff --git a/drivers/net/vxlan.c b/drivers/net/vxlan.c
>> >> > index 4d52aa9..b148739 100644
>> >> > --- a/drivers/net/vxlan.c
>> >> > +++ b/drivers/net/vxlan.c
>> >> > @@ -568,7 +569,8 @@ static struct sk_buff **vxlan_gro_receive(struct sk_buff **head, struct sk_buff
>> >> >                         continue;
>> >> >
>> >> >                 vh2 = (struct vxlanhdr *)(p->data + off_vx);
>> >> > -               if (vh->vx_vni != vh2->vx_vni) {
>> >> > +               if (vh->vx_flags != vh2->vx_flags ||
>> >> > +                   vh->vx_vni != vh2->vx_vni) {
>> >>
>> >> It's probably better to do a memcmp over the entire header. There's no
>> >> guarantee that new fields will be entirely represented by flags.
>> >
>> > vx_flags covers the entire first 32 bit of vxlanhdr so it's
>> > equivalent to a memcmp() already. I can change it to memcmp() if
>> > you think that's more readable.
>>
>> I was actually referring to the reserved 8 bit chunk after the VNI.
>> This could potentially be used for something in the future.
>
> Shouldn't that be covered by vh->vx_vni != vh2->vx_vni? I may
> still misunderstand, sorry.

Ah, sorry. I see that vx_vni is 4 bytes instead of 3 bytes of the
actual VNI. I agree that the whole header is covered for GRO purposes.
The definition of the VNI field is a little confusing but I guess it's
more efficient than the alternative.
--
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