netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

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: <CAK+XE=nSQQ5NY2iY9CnFDmb8FLRsR81AR0+tqGScO0Nngo=w7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Mar 2018 23:57:18 +0000
From:   John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>
To:     Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] offload linux bonding tc ingress rules

On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 3:28 PM, John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com> wrote:
>> This RFC patchset adds support for offloading tc ingress rules applied to
>> linux bonds. The premise of these patches is that if a rule is applied to
>> a bond port then the rule should be applied to each slave of the bond.
>>
>> The linux bond itself registers a cb for offloading tc rules. Potential
>> slave netdevs on offload devices can then register with the bond for a
>> further callback - this code is basically the same as registering for an
>> egress dev offload in TC. Then when a rule is offloaded to the bond, it
>> can be relayed to each netdev that has registered with the bond code and
>> which is a slave of the given bond.
>>
>> To prevent sync issues between the kernel and offload device, the linux
>> bond driver is affectively locked when it has offloaded rules. i.e no new
>> ports can be enslaved and no slaves can be released until the offload
>> rules are removed. Similarly, if a port on a bond is deleted, the bond is
>> destroyed, forcing a flush of all offloaded rules.
>>
>> Also included in the RFC are changes to the NFP driver to utilise the new
>> code by registering NFP port representors for bond offload rules and
>> modifying cookie handling to allow the relaying of a rule to multiple ports.
>
> what is your approach for rules whose bond is their egress device
> (ingress = vf port
> representor)?

Egress offload will be handled entirely by the NFP driver.
Basically, notifiers will track the slaves/masters and update the card
with any groups that consist entirely of reprs.
We then offload the TC rule outputting to the given group - because it
is an ingress match we can access the egress netdev in the block
callback.