netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

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: <20180525064809.GG2295@nanopsycho>
Date:   Fri, 25 May 2018 08:48:09 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...ronome.com, Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] nfp: offload LAG for tc flower egress

Thu, May 24, 2018 at 04:22:47AM CEST, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com wrote:
>Hi!
>
>This series from John adds bond offload to the nfp driver.  Patch 5
>exposes the hash type for NETDEV_LAG_TX_TYPE_HASH to make sure nfp
>hashing matches that of the software LAG.  This may be unnecessarily
>conservative, let's see what LAG maintainers think :)

So you need to restrict offload to only certain hash algo? In mlxsw, we
just ignore the lag setting and do some hw default hashing. Would not be
enough? Note that there's a good reason for it, as you see, in team, the
hashing is done in a BPF function and could be totally arbitrary.
Your patchset effectively disables team offload for nfp.