netdev - Re: [patch net-next 14/17] mlxsw: spectrum_router: Add support for IPv6 routes addition / deletion

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: <ca78d11f-bf7d-5fd3-756b-6faedfd86758@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:36:52 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, mlxsw@...lanox.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
        nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com, kafai@...com,
        hannes@...essinduktion.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
        edumazet@...gle.com, yanhaishuang@...s.chinamobile.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 14/17] mlxsw: spectrum_router: Add support for
 IPv6 routes addition / deletion

On 7/19/17 10:30 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> rif == 0 means the dst device is not related to a port owned by this
>> driver?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>>
>>
>> A lot to process so I am sure I missed the answer to these:
>>
>> 1. How do you handle host routes for local addresses? IPv6 inserts the
>> host and anycast routes with the device set to 'lo' (or VRF device)
>> instead of the device with the address. I have a patch to change this,
>> but needs more testing
> 
> In mlxsw_sp_fib6_entry_type_set() we check for RTF_LOCAL and set the
> FIB entry type to MLXSW_SP_FIB_ENTRY_TYPE_TRAP. Packets hitting these
> routes will be trapped with IP2ME trap ID towards the CPU.

got it. thanks.

> 
>> 2. How are routes with devices unrelated to ports owned by this driver
>> handled?
> 
> They are handled just like any other route, but they don't have a valid
> RIF (for directly connected routes) or an adjacency group (for
> gatewayed routes), so the check in mlxsw_sp_fib_entry_should_offload()
> will return false and they will be programmed to the device with trap
> action, but using a trap ID (RTR_INGRESS0) with a lower traffic class
> than IP2ME, so packets that actually need to be locally received by the
> CPU have a better QoS.

so mlxsw keeps a copy of the complete FIB for IPv4 and IPv6, even routes
unrelated to its ports?