netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/5] act_mirred: use TC_ACT

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]

Date:   Tue, 24 Jul 2018 14:15:25 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
        Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/5] act_mirred: use TC_ACT_REINJECT when possible

On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 1:07 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> +
> +               /* let's the caller reinject the packet, if possible */
> +               if (skb_at_tc_ingress(skb)) {
> +                       res->ingress = want_ingress;
> +                       res->qstats = this_cpu_ptr(m->common.cpu_qstats);
> +                       return TC_ACT_REINJECT;
> +               }

Looks good to me, but here we no longer return user-specified
return value here, I am sure it is safe for TC_ACT_STOLEN, but
I am not sure if it is safe for other values, like TC_ACT_RECLASSIFY.

Jamal, is there any use case of returning !TC_ACT_STOLEN for
ingress redirections?

Thanks.