netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] route: allow to route in a peer netns via lwt framework

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: <55B25798.2040706@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:19:52 -0600
From:	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, davem@...emloft.net
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, tgraf@...g.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] route: allow to route in a peer netns via lwt
 framework

On 7/24/15 8:32 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
> Le 24/07/2015 16:28, David Ahern a écrit :
>> On 7/23/15 8:22 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>>>   static netdev_tx_t loopback_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb,
>>>                    struct net_device *dev)
>>>   {
>>> +    int nsid = skb_lwt_netns_info(skb);
>>>       struct pcpu_lstats *lb_stats;
>>>       int len;
>>>
>>> +    if (nsid >= 0) {
>>> +        struct net *peernet = get_net_ns_by_id(dev_net(dev), nsid);
>>> +
>>> +        if (!peernet) {
>>
>> If nsid is > 0 then the peer namespace should exist right? So for this
>> failure
>> path why not increment tx_error stat?
> I was not sure about that, because before my patch we increment
> statistics only
> in case of NET_RX_SUCCESS.

In this case you are knowingly dropping packets. Would be nice to have a 
counter showing that.
--
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