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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 8 Jan 2016 16:38:29 -0800
From:	Jesse Gross <>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 8/8] geneve: break dependency to network drivers

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
<> wrote:
> On 08.01.2016 22:12, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa
>> <> wrote:
>>> On 07.01.2016 01:18, Jesse Gross wrote:
>>>> I think we should merge vxlan_get_rx_port() and geneve_get_rx_port()
>>>> into a single generic function. For drivers that support both, they
>>>> now have two calls to get notified for all offloaded ports. This
>>>> actually can cause problems related to duplicates, similar to what you
>>>> feared before.
>>> Checking out the ndo_add_vxlan_port callbacks, we cannot change how we
>>> refresh the ports unfortunately. For some drivers it might be easy to
>>> update, some look a little bit more complicated.
>>> I guess we should try to keep more complexity in the core and make sure
>>> we
>>> only call those functions if necessary for the particular type of offload
>>> than to replicate the logic in each driver.
>>> If you agree I prepare this series with the changes to have separate
>>> callbacks, address your other feedback and send it out.
>> I'm not sure that I totally understand, do you have an example of a
>> problematic driver?
> bnx2x e.g. does refcounting on the port. So when it will implement geneve
> offloading, it will refcount the vxlan port multiple times with the current
> schema. Currently this is safe, as bnx2x doesn't care about geneve and thus
> no further callbacks will happen. But I fear drivers being broken as soon as
> they implement geneve additionally with the current schema.

OK, I understand what you mean now. I guess having a combined callback
function still seems cleaner to me overall and the exceptions are
relatively few, so I would probably continue to lean towards this
direction. In any case, I think it's hard for the core network stack
to completely handle the complexity as drivers can have various
restrictions on the number of ports, etc. that they support for

Powered by blists - more mailing lists