netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] ipv6: sr: add option to control lwtunnel support

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: <5835AE68.3060003@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2016 06:57:44 -0800
From:   Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     David Lebrun <david.lebrun@...ouvain.be>
CC:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] ipv6: sr: add option to control lwtunnel
 support

On 11/23/16, 1:28 AM, David Lebrun wrote:
> On 11/23/2016 08:34 AM, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
>> I can't seem to reproduce the problem you are seeing. still trying..
>> I don't have CONFIG_LWTUNNEL set nor any of the other SEG6 configs.
>> My CONFIG_IPV6 is on and compiled as a module. I have also tried disabling it.
>> If you can send me the config, I can try again. Looking back at the patches,
>> I do see a few things below ..but they may not fix your problem directly.
>>
>> Though I had none of the ipv6 segment routing configs turned on,
>> I do see the "Segment Routing with IPv6" msg at bootup.
>> Was looking at david's patches again, and a few things (I had missed seeing the last version):
>>
>> In my review comment I was hinting at CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6 to cover all of ipv6 segment routing,
>> including the lwtunnel bits.
>>
>> something like below:
>>
>> config IPV6_SEG6
>>         bool "IPv6: Segment Routing Header encapsulation support"
>>         depends on LWTUNNEL && IPV6
>>
>> DavidL, do you see a problem doing it this way ?. with this 'seg6.o' will be part of CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6 and not
>> get initialized unless it is enabled..which seems like the right thing to do.
> Can't reproduce the bug either, with CONFIG_IPV6=y, LWTUNNEL=n and all
> SEG6 disabled. Alexei, your .config and dmesg log could help.
>
> Roopa, the reason why seg6.o is compiled by default is that it provides
> an interface to control HMAC structures, and that HMAC does not depends
> on lwtunnels and can be used in the extension header processing (which
> is compiled by default). I could indeed add another option to
> conditionnally compile seg6.o if HMAC is enabled etc, and I actually had
> something like that in the very first versions of the patch, but I
> received comments that too much options is not a good thing (and I agree
> with that).

okay then. I agree with not having too many option. I had just thought that it
could live with the existing CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6_LWTUNNEL if it was renamed.
had not  looked at the HMAC dependency.