netdev - Re: [PATCH 02/14] tcp: fix mark propagation with fwmark

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: <1485458926.5145.156.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Jan 2017 11:28:46 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Cc:     netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] tcp: fix mark propagation with fwmark_reflect
 enabled

On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 20:19 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:

> Right. This is not percpu as in IPv4.
> 
> I can send a follow up patch to get this in sync with the way we do it
> in IPv4, ie. add percpu socket.
> 
> Fine with this approach? Thanks!

Not really.

percpu sockets are going to slow down network namespace creation /
deletion and increase memory foot print.

IPv6 is cleaner because it does not really have to use different
sockets.

Ultimately would would like to have the same for IPv4.

I would rather carry the mark either in an additional parameter,
or in the flow that is already passed as a parameter.