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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 00:32:32 +0200 From: Iwan R Timmer <irtimmer@...il.com> To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> Cc: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add support for port mirroring On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:55:05PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:23:01PM +0200, Iwan R Timmer wrote: > > Add support for configuring port mirroring through the cls_matchall > > classifier. We do a full ingress and/or egress capture towards the > > capture port, configured with set_egress_port. > > Hi Iwan > > This looks good as far as it goes. > > Have you tried adding/deleting multiple port mirrors? Do we need to > limit how many are added. A quick look at the datasheet, you can > define one egress mirror port and one ingress mirror port. I think you > can have multiple ports mirroring ingress to that one ingress mirror > port. And you can have multiple port mirroring egress to the one > egress mirror port. We should add code to check this, and return > -EBUSY if the existing configuration prevents a new mirror being > configured. > > Thanks > Andrew Hi Andrew, I only own a simple 5 ports switch (88E6176) which has no problem of mirroring the other ports to a single port. Except for a bandwith shortage ofcourse. While I thought I checked adding and removing ports, I seemed to forgot to check removing ingress traffic as it will now disable mirroring egress traffic. Searching for how I can distinct ingress from egress mirroring in port_mirror_del, I saw there is a variable in the mirror struct called ingress. Which seems strange, because why is it a seperate argument to the port_mirror_add function? Origally I planned to be able to set the egress and ingress mirror seperatly. But in my laziness when I saw there already was a function to configure the destination port this functionality was lost. Because the other drivers which implemented the port_mirror_add (b53 and ksz9477) also lacks additional checks to prevent new mirror filters from breaking previous ones I assumed they were not necessary. At least I will soon sent a new version with at least the issue of removing mirror ingress traffic fixed and the ability to define a seperate ingress and egress port. Regards, Iwan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists