netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next v3 6/8] flow_dissector: handle no-skb use case

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, 26 Mar 2019 11:08:33 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v3 6/8] flow_dissector: handle no-skb use case

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:52 AM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> The BPF flow dissector should work the same. It is fine to pass the
> data including ethernet header, but parsing can start at nhoff with
> proto explicitly passed.
>
> We should not assume Ethernet link layer.

then skb-less dissector has to be different program type
because semantics are different.