netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] nfp: flower: support offloading multiple rules with same cookie

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: <CAJ3xEMhv5e9gOx-qELt=YMcpe9Svi=6uKYXs4c9PXDXOR35kow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:56:36 +0300
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com, ASAP_Direct_Dev@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] nfp: flower: support offloading multiple
 rules with same cookie

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:51 AM, John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 7:31 AM, Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 7:17 AM, Jakub Kicinski
>> <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
>>> From: John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>
>>>
>>> When multiple netdevs are attached to a tc offload block and register for
>>> callbacks, a rule added to the block will be propogated to all netdevs.
>>> Previously these were detected as duplicates (based on cookie) and
>>> rejected. Modify the rule nfp lookup function to optionally include an
>>> ingress netdev and a host context along with the cookie value when
>>> searching for a rule. When a new rule is passed to the driver, the netdev
>>> the rule is to be attached to is considered when searching for dublicates.
>>
>> so if the same rule (cookie) is provided to the driver through multiple ingress
>> devices you will not reject it -- what is the use case for that, is it
>> block sharing?
>
> Hi Or,
> Yes, block sharing is the current use-case.
> Simple example for clarity....
> Here we want to offload the filter to both ingress devs nfp_0 and nfp_1:
>
> tc qdisc add dev nfp_p0 ingress_block 22 ingress
> tc qdisc add dev nfp_p1 ingress_block 22 ingress
> tc filter add block 22 protocol ip parent ffff: flower skip_sw
> ip_proto tcp action drop

cool!

Just out of curiosity, do you actually share this HW rule or you duplicate it?