netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/2] net/sched: cls_flower, act

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, 15 Aug 2016 09:35:50 -0700
From:	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:	Amir Vadai <amir@...ai.me>, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:	Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Hadar Har-Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>,
	Oded Shanoon <odeds@...lanox.com>,
	Amir Vadai <amirva@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/2] net/sched: cls_flower, act_mirred: VXLAN
 redirect using TC

On 16-08-15 04:36 AM, Amir Vadai wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 06:41:14AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>> On 16-08-15 06:24 AM, Shmulik Ladkani wrote:
>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 06:08:10 -0400, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
>>
>>>> Assuming $VXLAN is actually not a linux netdev of type vxlan?
>>>> then the action does vxlan encap redirect sends it to the $VXLAN
>>>> dev with encapsulation in place.
>>>
>>> I assume Amir refers to vxlan netdev in VXLAN_F_COLLECT_METADATA mode,
>>> using the tun_info metadata found in skb_metadata_dst.
>>> The action is supposed to assign the tun metadata.
>>>
>>
>> I see - so you let the vxlan netdev do the encap?
>> Would it still scale to a _very large_ number of tunnels?
>> How many netdevs are you going to use? I am assuming you will hit
>> a nasty lock somewhere(qdisc?) if you use only one.
> Having a netdev per tunnel is problematic in its memory use [1].
> User can take each of the approaches. Can have a shared netdev, but will
> have some contention on the qdisc lock, or create a vxlan dev per VNI
> and increase memory use.
> When offloading will be added, shared netdev will enjoy all worlds - low
> memory use and no lock contention.
> 

vxlan devices are lockless if your worried about many netdevs using
shared netdev with metadata is a good approach.


static void vxlan_setup(struct net_device *dev)
{
        struct vxlan_dev *vxlan = netdev_priv(dev);
        unsigned int h;

        eth_hw_addr_random(dev);
        ether_setup(dev);

        dev->destructor = free_netdev;
        SET_NETDEV_DEVTYPE(dev, &vxlan_type);

        dev->features   |= NETIF_F_LLTX;		<--- ;) here
        dev->features   |= NETIF_F_SG | NETIF_F_HW_CSUM;
        dev->features   |= NETIF_F_RXCSUM;
        dev->features   |= NETIF_F_GSO_SOFTWARE;


> 
> [1] - http://www.netdevconf.org/1.1/proceedings/slides/ahern-aleksandrov-prabhu-scaling-network-cumulus.pdf
> 
>>
>> cheers,
>> jamal