netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3 v3] changes to make ipv4 routing table aware of next-hop link status

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: <CAE4R7bC6ETRRdkm02V8gcnAEmp=Te+jczSqX9nsOPGs13_jtGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:44:55 -0700
From:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
To:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, ddutt@...ulusnetworks.com,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	"stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3 v3] changes to make ipv4 routing table aware
 of next-hop link status

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Andy Gospodarek
<gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 08:07:10PM -0700, Scott Feldman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Andy Gospodarek
>> <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>>
>> > There was also a request for switchdev support for this, but that will be
>> > posted as a followup as switchdev does not currently handle dead
>> > next-hops in a multi-path case and I felt that infra needed to be added
>> > first.
>>
>> That's not true.  switchdev_fib_ipv4_add() passes *fi and all of the
>> nexthops for the route are hanging off of that, including the
>> nh->flags where you're setting LINKDOWN.  Multipath is not different
>> than singlepath in that regard.  Same API for both.
>
> The API is the same, but I did not see a path that would take a
> multipath route and update the dead nexthops when an interface is taken
> down with switchdev or rocker today.
>
> I could be wrong (and I will test again), but create a multipath route
> with nexthops on swp1 and swp2 and then call 'ip link set swp1 down' and
> let me know if you see rocker's ECMP routes get updated so only the
> nexthop on swp2 will be used.

I don't have ecmp support in rocker yet, but switchdev should be ready
for ecmp.  I tried the test you suggest and switchdev is calling into
the driver with updates to the routes with nhs marked DEAD.  So maybe
your patchset is switchdev-ready?  I'd have to apply your patch to
test. I'll wait for your v4 to address sysctl naming.
--
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