| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAE4R7bBH3dTfivKqo9qzRVhtpUiDzGdDmoeceY5YBq6A3VR03g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 22:32:54 -0700
From: Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
john fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC net-next] rocker: forward packets to CPU when a port
in promiscuous mode
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Simon Horman
<simon.horman@...ronome.com> wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:37:59PM -0700, Scott Feldman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com> wrote:
>> > This change allows the CPU to see all packets seen by a port when the
>> > netdev associated with the port is in promiscuous mode.
>> >
>> > This change was previously posted as part of a larger patch and in turn
>> > patchset which also aimed to allow rocker interfaces to receive packets
>> > when not bridged. That problem has subsequently been addressed in a
>> > different way by Scott Feldman.
>> >
>> > When this change was previously posted Scott indicated that he had some
>> > reservations about sending all packets from a switch to the CPU. The
>> > purpose of posting this patch is to start discussion of weather this
>> > approach is appropriate and if not how else we might move forwards.
>> >
>> > In my opinion if host doesn't want all packets its shouldn't put a port
>> > in promiscuous mode. But perhaps that is an overly naïve view to take.
>> >
>> > My main motivation for this change at this time is to allow rocker to
>> > work with Open vSwitch and it appears that this change is sufficient to
>> > reach that goal. Another approach might be to teach
>> > rocker_port_master_changed() about Open vSwitch.
>> >
>> > In the longer term I believe Open vSwitch should be able to program
>> > flows into rocker 'hardware' and thus not all packets would reach the CPU.
>>
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> I like your alternate approach to teach rocker about Open vSwitch
>> using rocker_port_master_change() and only when port is captured by
>> OVS would we install the "promisc" filter to pass all traffic up.
>> (Maybe call it ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_OVS rule?).
>>
>> Putting a non-bridged, non-ovs port into promisc is kind of weird for
>> a switch port. I think of the port in L3 mode by default, where the
>> port is locked down for all but some selective mcasts, and only opened
>> up by installing explicit routes. (Unlike a bridged port where we
>> flood everything L2 we don't understand).
>>
>> So maybe first pass is to pass up everything when port is captured by
>> OVS, and then later refine what's passed up per ovs flows on that
>> port.
>
> That sounds reasonable to me. Its pretty clear to me from the responses
> from John and yourself that my approach to the promiscuous flag isn't
> as clean-cut as I had hoped. And it seems that we have a nice way to
> move forwards on supporting Open vSwitch.
>
> How about this?
Looks good, some inline comments...
> From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
>
> Subject: rocker: forward packets to CPU when port is joined to openvswitch
>
> Teach rocker to forward packets to CPU when a port is joined to Open vSwitch.
> There is scope to later refine what is passed up as per Open vSwitch flows
> on a port.
>
> This does not change the behaviour of rocker ports that are
> not joined to Open vSwitch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker.c
> index c0051673c9fa..8c53d6839260 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/rocker/rocker.c
> @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ enum {
> ROCKER_CTRL_IPV4_MCAST,
> ROCKER_CTRL_IPV6_MCAST,
> ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_BRIDGING,
> + ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_OVS,
> ROCKER_CTRL_MAX,
> };
>
> @@ -321,9 +322,21 @@ static u16 rocker_port_vlan_to_vid(const struct rocker_port *rocker_port,
> return ntohs(vlan_id);
> }
>
> +static bool rocker_port_is_bridged__(const struct rocker_port *rocker_port,
> + const char *kind)
Maybe use __rocker_port_is_bridged? (leading '__'; I've not seen use
of trailing '__'). Or __rocker_port_is_slave(port, kind)?
> +{
> + return rocker_port->bridge_dev &&
> + !strcmp(rocker_port->bridge_dev->rtnl_link_ops->kind, kind);
> +}
> +
> static bool rocker_port_is_bridged(const struct rocker_port *rocker_port)
> {
> - return !!rocker_port->bridge_dev;
> + return rocker_port_is_bridged__(rocker_port, "bridge");
> +}
> +
> +static bool rocker_port_is_ovs(const struct rocker_port *rocker_port)
rocker_port_is_ovsed? Just to be consistent with is_bridged.
> +{
> + return rocker_port_is_bridged__(rocker_port, "openvswitch");
> }
>
> #define ROCKER_OP_FLAG_REMOVE BIT(0)
> @@ -3275,6 +3288,12 @@ static struct rocker_ctrl {
> .bridge = true,
> .copy_to_cpu = true,
> },
> + [ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_OVS] = {
> + /* pass all pkts up to CPU */
> + .eth_dst = zero_mac,
> + .eth_dst_mask = zero_mac,
> + .acl = true,
> + },
> };
>
> static int rocker_port_ctrl_vlan_acl(struct rocker_port *rocker_port,
> @@ -3787,11 +3806,14 @@ static int rocker_port_stp_update(struct rocker_port *rocker_port,
> break;
> case BR_STATE_LEARNING:
> case BR_STATE_FORWARDING:
> - want[ROCKER_CTRL_LINK_LOCAL_MCAST] = true;
> + if (!rocker_port_is_ovs(rocker_port))
> + want[ROCKER_CTRL_LINK_LOCAL_MCAST] = true;
> want[ROCKER_CTRL_IPV4_MCAST] = true;
> want[ROCKER_CTRL_IPV6_MCAST] = true;
> if (rocker_port_is_bridged(rocker_port))
> want[ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_BRIDGING] = true;
> + else if (rocker_port_is_ovs(rocker_port))
> + want[ROCKER_CTRL_DFLT_OVS] = true;
> else
> want[ROCKER_CTRL_LOCAL_ARP] = true;
> break;
> @@ -5251,6 +5273,22 @@ static int rocker_port_bridge_leave(struct rocker_port *rocker_port)
> return err;
> }
>
> +
> +static int rocker_port_ovs_changed(struct rocker_port *rocker_port,
> + struct net_device *master)
> +{
> + int err;
> +
> + rocker_port->bridge_dev = master;
> +
> + err = rocker_port_fwd_disable(rocker_port, SWITCHDEV_TRANS_NONE, 0);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + err = rocker_port_fwd_enable(rocker_port, SWITCHDEV_TRANS_NONE, 0);
> +
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> static int rocker_port_master_changed(struct net_device *dev)
> {
> struct rocker_port *rocker_port = netdev_priv(dev);
> @@ -5263,11 +5301,16 @@ static int rocker_port_master_changed(struct net_device *dev)
> * 3. Other, e.g. being added to or removed from a bond or openvswitch,
> * in which case nothing is done
> */
Maybe comment above needs adjusting?
> - if (master && master->rtnl_link_ops &&
> - !strcmp(master->rtnl_link_ops->kind, "bridge"))
> - err = rocker_port_bridge_join(rocker_port, master);
> - else if (rocker_port_is_bridged(rocker_port))
> + if (master && master->rtnl_link_ops) {
> + if (!strcmp(master->rtnl_link_ops->kind, "bridge"))
> + err = rocker_port_bridge_join(rocker_port, master);
> + else if (!strcmp(master->rtnl_link_ops->kind, "openvswitch"))
> + err = rocker_port_ovs_changed(rocker_port, master);
> + } else if (rocker_port_is_bridged(rocker_port)) {
> err = rocker_port_bridge_leave(rocker_port);
> + } else if (rocker_port_is_ovs(rocker_port)) {
> + err = rocker_port_ovs_changed(rocker_port, NULL);
> + }
>
> return err;
> }
> --
> 2.1.4
>
>
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists