netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3 v3] net: track link-status of ipv4 nexthops

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: <CAE4R7bC=bKhMDVc9JT7YeFFDAi8Hn8GySd_b5Oa2uQ=bnbi8_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:53:59 -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 1/3 v3] net: track link-status of ipv4 nexthops

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Andy Gospodarek
<gospo@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:

> @@ -1129,7 +1142,15 @@ int fib_sync_down_dev(struct net_device *dev, int force)
>                                 dead++;
>                         else if (nexthop_nh->nh_dev == dev &&
>                                  nexthop_nh->nh_scope != scope) {
> -                               nexthop_nh->nh_flags |= RTNH_F_DEAD;
> +                               switch (event) {
> +                               case NETDEV_DOWN:
> +                               case NETDEV_UNREGISTER:
> +                                       nexthop_nh->nh_flags |= RTNH_F_DEAD;
> +                                       /* fall through */
> +                               case NETDEV_CHANGE:
> +                                       nexthop_nh->nh_flags |= RTNH_F_LINKDOWN;
> +                                       break;
> +                               }
>  #ifdef CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH
>                                 spin_lock_bh(&fib_multipath_lock);
>                                 fi->fib_power -= nexthop_nh->nh_power;
> @@ -1139,14 +1160,22 @@ int fib_sync_down_dev(struct net_device *dev, int force)
>                                 dead++;
>                         }
>  #ifdef CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH
> -                       if (force > 1 && nexthop_nh->nh_dev == dev) {
> +                       if (event == NETDEV_UNREGISTER && nexthop_nh->nh_dev == dev) {
>                                 dead = fi->fib_nhs;
>                                 break;
>                         }
>  #endif
>                 } endfor_nexthops(fi)
>                 if (dead == fi->fib_nhs) {
> -                       fi->fib_flags |= RTNH_F_DEAD;
> +                       switch (event) {
> +                       case NETDEV_DOWN:
> +                       case NETDEV_UNREGISTER:
> +                               fi->fib_flags |= RTNH_F_DEAD;
> +                               /* fall through */
> +                       case NETDEV_CHANGE:
> +                               fi->fib_flags |= RTNH_F_LINKDOWN;

RTNH_F_LINKDOWN is to mark linkdown nexthop devs....why is the route
fi being marked RTNH_F_LINKDOWN?

The RTNH_F_LINKDOWN comment says:

#define RTNH_F_LINKDOWN                16      /* carrier-down on nexthop */

It's a per-nh flag, not per-route flag, correct?

Can you show an ECMP example with only a subset of the nexthops dev
linkdowned?  Show the ip route output after going thru some link
down/up events on some of the nexthops devs.
--
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