netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ocelot_ace: fix action of trap

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: <20190813134236.GG15047@lunn.ch>
Date:   Tue, 13 Aug 2019 15:42:36 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     "Y.b. Lu" <yangbo.lu@....com>
Cc:     "Allan W. Nielsen" <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ocelot_ace: fix action of trap

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 02:12:47AM +0000, Y.b. Lu wrote:
> Hi Allan,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Allan W. Nielsen <allan.nielsen@...rochip.com>
> > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 8:32 PM
> > To: Y.b. Lu <yangbo.lu@....com>
> > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; David S . Miller <davem@...emloft.net>;
> > Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>; Microchip Linux Driver
> > Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ocelot_ace: fix action of trap
> > 
> > The 08/12/2019 18:48, Yangbo Lu wrote:
> > > The trap action should be copying the frame to CPU and dropping it for
> > > forwarding, but current setting was just copying frame to CPU.
> > 
> > Are there any actions which do a "copy-to-cpu" and still forward the frame in
> > HW?
> 
> [Y.b. Lu] We're using Felix switch whose code hadn't been accepted by upstream.
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?series=115399&state=*
> 
> I'd like to trap all IEEE 1588 PTP Ethernet frames to CPU through etype 0x88f7.

Is this the correct way to handle PTP for this switch? For other
switches we don't need such traps. The switch itself identifies PTP
frames and forwards them to the CPU so it can process them.

I'm just wondering if your general approach is wrong?

    Andrew