[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALx6S34ymDARX9EjCUZtHzd=+iUpry5WbCR4axXSDFBhVSTDUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:27:32 -0700
From: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
To: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
gospo@...ulusnetworks.com, jtoppins@...ulusnetworks.com,
nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com, ddutt@...ulusnetworks.com,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
hadi@...atatu.com, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, svaidya@...cade.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 04/11] udp: Handle VRF device in sendmsg
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 1:59 PM, David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> For unconnected UDP sockets using a VRF device lookup source address
> based on VRF table. This allows the UDP header to be properly setup
> before showing up at the VRF device via the dst.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shrijeet Mukherjee <shm@...ulusnetworks.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
> ---
> net/ipv4/udp.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> index 83aa604f9273..7af5052e3b1f 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> @@ -1013,11 +1013,31 @@ int udp_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
>
> if (!rt) {
> struct net *net = sock_net(sk);
> + __u8 flow_flags = inet_sk_flowi_flags(sk);
>
> fl4 = &fl4_stack;
> +
> + /* unconnected socket. If output device is enslaved to a VRF
> + * device lookup source address from VRF table. This mimics
> + * behavior of ip_route_connect{_init}.
> + */
> + if (netif_index_is_vrf(net, ipc.oif)) {
> + flowi4_init_output(fl4, ipc.oif, sk->sk_mark, tos,
> + RT_SCOPE_UNIVERSE, sk->sk_protocol,
> + (flow_flags | FLOWI_FLAG_VRFSRC),
> + faddr, saddr, dport,
> + inet->inet_sport);
> +
> + rt = ip_route_output_flow(net, fl4, sk);
> + if (!IS_ERR(rt)) {
> + saddr = fl4->saddr;
> + ip_rt_put(rt);
> + }
> + }
> +
I really don't like this. It seems like you're putting device specific
code in a critical L4 data path function. Also, does ipv6/udp.c need
be updated similarly? Why can't VRF be abstracted out in routing
lookups?
Tom
> flowi4_init_output(fl4, ipc.oif, sk->sk_mark, tos,
> RT_SCOPE_UNIVERSE, sk->sk_protocol,
> - inet_sk_flowi_flags(sk),
> + flow_flags,
> faddr, saddr, dport, inet->inet_sport);
>
> security_sk_classify_flow(sk, flowi4_to_flowi(fl4));
> --
> 2.3.2 (Apple Git-55)
>
> --
> 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
--
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