netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH] net: sched: cls_flower: Classify packets using port ranges

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: <CAM_iQpWzzdnoo6JZPxSX8hnSqaEuH9RYk4CJbCK_FWPdBg1Ekw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Oct 2018 22:41:15 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     amritha.nambiar@...el.com,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: sched: cls_flower: Classify packets using
 port ranges

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:42 PM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> From: Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@...el.com>
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 06:53:30 -0700
>
> > Added support in tc flower for filtering based on port ranges.
> > This is a rework of the RFC patch at:
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/969595/
>
> You never addressed Cong's feedback asking you to explain why this
> can't be simply built using existing generic filtering facilities that
> exist already.
>
> I appreciate that you addressed Jiri's feedback, but Cong's feedback is
> just as, if not more, important.
>

My objection is against introducing a new filter just for port range, now
it is built on top of flower filter, so it is much better now.

u32 filter can do the nearly same, but requires a power-of-two, so it is
not completely duplicated.

Therefore, I think the idea of building it on top of flower is fine. But I don't
read into any code, only the description.

Thanks!