netdev - Re: [patch net-next 00/10] net: sched: introduce multichain support for filters

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170428065349.GB1886@nanopsycho.orion>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2017 08:53:49 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        mlxsw@...lanox.com, Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 00/10] net: sched: introduce multichain support
 for filters

Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:46:03PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> Simple example:
>> $ tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress
>> $ tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip pref 33 flower dst_mac 52:54:00:3d:c7:6d action goto chain 11
>> $ tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip pref 22 chain 11 flower dst_ip 192.168.40.1 action drop
>> $ tc filter show dev eth0 root
>
>Interesting.
>
>I don't look into the code yet. If I understand the concepts correctly,
>so with your patchset we can mark either filter with a chain No. to
>choose which chain it belongs to _logically_ even though
>_physically_ it is still in the old-fashion chain (prio, proto)?

You have to see the code :)

There are physically multiple chains


>
>If so, you have to ensure proto is same since the protocol of
>the packet does not change dynamically? And the original
>priority becomes pointless with chains since we can just to
>any other chain in any order?
>
>By default, without any chain No., you use 0 for all the chains,
>so the old-fashion chain still works.

Yes.

>
>Thanks.