[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55B10D50.9010704@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:50:40 -0700
From: roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To: nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com
CC: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, tgraf@...g.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] route: allow to route in a peer netns via lwt
framework
On 7/23/15, 8:25 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 23/07/2015 17:01, roopa a écrit :
>> On 7/23/15, 7:22 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> [snip]
>>> +static inline u32 *lwt_netns_info(struct lwtunnel_state *lwtstate)
>>> +{
>>> + return (u32 *)lwtstate->data;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static inline int skb_lwt_netns_info(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> +{
>>> + if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP)) {
>>> + struct rtable *rt = (struct rtable *)skb_dst(skb);
>>> +
>>> + if (rt && rt->rt_lwtstate)
>>> + return *lwt_netns_info(rt->rt_lwtstate);
>>> + } else if (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) {
>>> + struct rt6_info *rt6 = (struct rt6_info *)skb_dst(skb);
>>> +
>>> + if (rt6 && rt6->rt6i_lwtstate)
>>> + return *lwt_netns_info(rt6->rt6i_lwtstate);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return NETNSA_NSID_NOT_ASSIGNED;
>>> +}
>>> #endif /* __NET_LWTUNNEL_H */
>> since these apis' don't have to be netns specific,
>> Can they just be named lwtunnel_get_state_data and skb_lwtunnel_state ?
> They are specific to netns because lwtstate->data is interpreted as an
> u32 *.
> But I agree that a test is missing against lwtstate->type to ensure
> that data
> will be a nsid.
>
o ok..., the api's in lwtunnel.h today are not specific to an encap type.
they are generic, so skb_lwtunnel_state() which returns struct
lwtunnel_state could go here.
the encap specific ones can go in the respective callers. Recently
thomas added a similar
skb_tunnel_info() for ip tunnels. I did like to have a generic version
of your skb_lwt_netns_info in lwtunnel.h. I could use it in my mpls
output func too.
>>
>> and seems like they should be declared for both CONFIG_LWTUNNEL 'y'
>> and 'n'.
> It is outside the "#ifdef CONFIG_LWTUNNEL". I can successfully compile
> with and
> without CONFIG_LWTUNNEL.
ok,
thanks,
Roopa
--
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