netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/7] switchdev: add IPv4 routing offload

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: <20150305.000437.973765566269717091.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 05 Mar 2015 00:04:37 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	sfeldma@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/7] switchdev: add IPv4 routing offload

From: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 20:50:28 -0800

> In v3, net/ipv4/*.c doesn't know if the driver skipped installing a
> route to hw.  The driver returns 0 as if it was installed. So the
> driver has to mark the ones actually installed.
> 
> This is why in v2 had return code -EOPNOTSUPP for routes that are
> skipped by driver.  For example, rocker currently skips ECMP routes.
> It's not an err condition.

The driver should say what it did.

> But I see driver could skip and not skip the wrong combination of
> routes such that we get a prefix split, for example.  We can't trust
> driver.

If the driver said "I did this" then we have to trust it, I don't
understand why this is an issue.
--
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