| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20180926084755.301f4aa6@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 08:47:55 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
thomas.lendacky@....com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
ariel.elior@...ium.com, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
santosh@...lsio.com, madalin.bucur@....com,
yisen.zhuang@...wei.com, salil.mehta@...wei.com,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, tariqt@...lanox.com,
saeedm@...lanox.com, jiri@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
ganeshgr@...lsio.com, linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com,
peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com,
joabreu@...opsys.com, grygorii.strashko@...com, andrew@...n.ch,
vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC,net-next 04/10] cls_flower: add translator to
flow_action representation
On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 21:19:55 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> This implements TC action to flow_action translation from cls_flower.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
> ---
> net/sched/cls_flower.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 123 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/sched/cls_flower.c b/net/sched/cls_flower.c
> index e1dd60a2ecb8..a96a80f01c6d 100644
> --- a/net/sched/cls_flower.c
> +++ b/net/sched/cls_flower.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,14 @@
>
> #include <net/dst.h>
> #include <net/dst_metadata.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_mirred.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_vlan.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_tunnel_key.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_pedit.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_csum.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_gact.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_skbedit.h>
> +#include <net/tc_act/tc_mirred.h>
>
> struct fl_flow_key {
> int indev_ifindex;
> @@ -101,6 +109,7 @@ struct cls_fl_filter {
> u32 in_hw_count;
> struct rcu_work rwork;
> struct net_device *hw_dev;
> + struct flow_action action;
> };
>
> static const struct rhashtable_params mask_ht_params = {
> @@ -294,6 +303,107 @@ static void fl_hw_destroy_filter(struct tcf_proto *tp, struct cls_fl_filter *f,
> tcf_block_offload_dec(block, &f->flags);
> }
>
> +static int fl_hw_setup_action(struct flow_action *flow_action,
> + const struct tcf_exts *exts)
The function doesn't seem very flower-specific?
> +{
> + const struct tc_action *act;
> + int num_acts = 0, i, j, k;
> +
> + if (!exts)
> + return 0;
> +
> + tcf_exts_for_each_action(i, act, exts) {
> + if (is_tcf_pedit(act))
> + num_acts += tcf_pedit_nkeys(act);
> + else
> + num_acts++;
> + }
> +
> + if (!num_acts)
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (flow_action_init(flow_action, num_acts) < 0)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + j = 0;
> + tcf_exts_for_each_action(i, act, exts) {
> + struct flow_action_key *key;
> +
> + key = &flow_action->keys[j];
> + if (is_tcf_gact_ok(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_ACCEPT;
> + } else if (is_tcf_gact_shot(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_DROP;
> + } else if (is_tcf_gact_trap(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_TRAP;
> + } else if (is_tcf_gact_goto_chain(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_GOTO;
> + key->chain_index = tcf_gact_goto_chain_index(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_mirred_egress_redirect(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_REDIRECT;
> + key->dev = tcf_mirred_dev(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_mirred_egress_mirror(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_MIRRED;
> + key->dev = tcf_mirred_dev(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_vlan(act)) {
> + switch (tcf_vlan_action(act)) {
> + case TCA_VLAN_ACT_PUSH:
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_VLAN_PUSH;
> + key->vlan.vid = tcf_vlan_push_vid(act);
> + key->vlan.proto = tcf_vlan_push_proto(act);
> + key->vlan.prio = tcf_vlan_push_prio(act);
> + break;
> + case TCA_VLAN_ACT_POP:
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_VLAN_POP;
> + break;
> + case TCA_VLAN_ACT_MODIFY:
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_VLAN_MANGLE;
> + key->vlan.vid = tcf_vlan_push_vid(act);
> + key->vlan.proto = tcf_vlan_push_proto(act);
> + key->vlan.prio = tcf_vlan_push_prio(act);
> + break;
> + }
> + } else if (is_tcf_tunnel_set(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_TUNNEL_ENCAP;
> + key->tunnel = tcf_tunnel_info(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_tunnel_release(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_TUNNEL_DECAP;
> + key->tunnel = tcf_tunnel_info(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_pedit(act)) {
> + for (k = 0; k < tcf_pedit_nkeys(act); k++) {
> + switch (tcf_pedit_cmd(act, k)) {
> + case TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_SET:
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_MANGLE;
> + break;
> + case TCA_PEDIT_KEY_EX_CMD_ADD:
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_ADD;
> + break;
> + default:
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + key->mangle.htype = tcf_pedit_htype(act, k);
> + key->mangle.mask = tcf_pedit_mask(act, k);
> + key->mangle.val = tcf_pedit_val(act, k);
> + key->mangle.offset = tcf_pedit_offset(act, k);
> + key = &flow_action->keys[++j];
> + }
> + } else if (is_tcf_csum(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_CSUM;
> + key->csum_flags = tcf_csum_update_flags(act);
> + } else if (is_tcf_skbedit_mark(act)) {
> + key->id = FLOW_ACTION_KEY_MARK;
> + key->mark = tcf_skbedit_mark(act);
> + }
Why the permissiveness? Shouldn't we error out if we there is an
unknown action?
else -EOPNOTSUPP + extack?
> +
> + if (!is_tcf_pedit(act))
> + j++;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int fl_hw_replace_filter(struct tcf_proto *tp,
> struct cls_fl_filter *f,
> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists