netdev - Re: [patch net-next 09/14] rocker: add rtnl ops for port mode [gs]etting

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]

Date:	Mon, 5 Oct 2015 19:50:25 +0200
From:	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>, eladr@...lanox.com,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 09/14] rocker: add rtnl ops for port mode
 [gs]etting

Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 07:43:23PM CEST, john.fastabend@...il.com wrote:
>On 15-10-05 10:24 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 07:07:30PM CEST, john.fastabend@...il.com wrote:
>> 
>> <snip>
>> 
>>>>
>>>> Again, to make this clear, worlds are not just a rehash of tables.
>>>>
>>>
>>> what are they then? Lets model those bits and let users configure them
>>> at runtime.
>>>
>>> So far I've had really good results modelling hardware as a 'parser',
>>> a set of tables, and a set of modify blocks. Now this breaks when you
>>> start to add black boxes in there for other functions such as encryption
>>> but I don't think your getting at that. Do you see something that
>>> couldn't be configured/modelled with those blocks?
>> 
>> How about an arbitrary BPF program? I can implement world that bases
>> mangling/forwarding packets on intensity of gravitational field.
>> Rocker hw is very free in that and cannot be pushed down to "table boxes".
>> 
>> That is making it a wild animal and challenges us to wrap it up in
>> kernel, somehow.
>> 
>
>Just for fun ;)
>
>I would model this as a parser that matches on gravitational field and
>and an action that does mangling/forwarding.
>
>So a table,
>
>	table { name "gravitational_field_table",
>		id 10,
>		size 1024,
>		matches {(gfield,mask)},
>		actions {mangle, forward},
>	      }
>
>rules would look like,
>
> match (gfield=0x1000, mask(0xff00)) -> action (mangle), action(forward)
>
>The user can populate these tables using some interface, the ebpf maps
>API looks nice and then programs running against hardware and software
>use the same API. Or the hardware could populate the table using a
>learning algorithm of some sort. Also you could push your bpf program
>to user space via an API so that we can create a software equiv of your
>hardware.
>
>I think we can tame the wild animal a bit by scoping it to the set of
>useful bpf programs. I guess we can argue about what useful is in this
>context. I'm going to argue forwarding by gravitational fields is going
>to be not so useful in practice.

Push into tables whatever you want, but please, leave our beloved
rocker out of it :)

--
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