netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: remove abuse of VLAN DEI/CFI bit

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:   Wed, 14 Dec 2016 03:03:05 +0100
From:   Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "open list:OPENVSWITCH" <dev@...nvswitch.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: remove abuse of VLAN DEI/CFI bit

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 05:21:18PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Sat,  3 Dec 2016 10:22:28 +0100 (CET)
> Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl> wrote:
> > This All-in-one patch removes abuse of VLAN CFI bit, so it can be passed
> > intact through linux networking stack.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław <michal.miroslaw@...ndesoftware.pl>
> > ---
> > 
> > Dear NetDevs
> > 
> > I guess this needs to be split to the prep..convert[]..finish sequence,
> > but if you like it as is, then it's ready.
> > 
> > The biggest question is if the modified interface and vlan_present
> > is the way to go. This can be changed to use vlan_proto != 0 instead
> > of an extra flag bit.
> > 
> > As I can't test most of the driver changes, please look at them carefully.
> > OVS and bridge eyes are especially welcome.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Michał Mirosław
> Is the motivation to support 802.1ad Drop Eligability Indicator (DEI)?
> 
> If so then you need to be more verbose in the commit log, and lots more
> work is needed. You need to rename fields and validate every place a
> driver is using DEI bit to make sure it really does the right thing
> on that hardware. It is not just a mechanical change.

My main motivation is to be able to see the bit intact in tcpdump and be
able to pass it untouched through at least a veth pair. It would be great
if all devices didn't do something stupid with the bit, but it's not
something I am able to make happen.

Best Regards,
Michał Mirosław