netdev - [PATCH net-next 7/9] ipv6: Handle multipath route deletion notification

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: <20191223132820.888247-8-idosch@idosch.org>
Date:   Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:28:18 +0200
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...il.com, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
        jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, jiri@...lanox.com,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 7/9] ipv6: Handle multipath route deletion notification

From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>

When an entire multipath route is deleted, only emit a notification if
it is the first route in the node. Emit a replace notification in case
the last sibling is followed by another route. Otherwise, emit a delete
notification.

Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
---
 net/ipv6/route.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)

diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
index c0809f52f9ef..646716a47cc9 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -3749,6 +3749,7 @@ static int __ip6_del_rt_siblings(struct fib6_info *rt, struct fib6_config *cfg)
 
 	if (rt->fib6_nsiblings && cfg->fc_delete_all_nh) {
 		struct fib6_info *sibling, *next_sibling;
+		struct fib6_node *fn;
 
 		/* prefer to send a single notification with all hops */
 		skb = nlmsg_new(rt6_nlmsg_size(rt), gfp_any());
@@ -3764,7 +3765,32 @@ static int __ip6_del_rt_siblings(struct fib6_info *rt, struct fib6_config *cfg)
 				info->skip_notify = 1;
 		}
 
+		/* 'rt' points to the first sibling route. If it is not the
+		 * leaf, then we do not need to send a notification. Otherwise,
+		 * we need to check if the last sibling has a next route or not
+		 * and emit a replace or delete notification, respectively.
+		 */
 		info->skip_notify_kernel = 1;
+		fn = rcu_dereference_protected(rt->fib6_node,
+					    lockdep_is_held(&table->tb6_lock));
+		if (rcu_access_pointer(fn->leaf) == rt) {
+			struct fib6_info *last_sibling, *replace_rt;
+
+			last_sibling = list_last_entry(&rt->fib6_siblings,
+						       struct fib6_info,
+						       fib6_siblings);
+			replace_rt = rcu_dereference_protected(
+					    last_sibling->fib6_next,
+					    lockdep_is_held(&table->tb6_lock));
+			if (replace_rt)
+				call_fib6_entry_notifiers_replace(net,
+								  replace_rt);
+			else
+				call_fib6_multipath_entry_notifiers(net,
+						       FIB_EVENT_ENTRY_DEL_TMP,
+						       rt, rt->fib6_nsiblings,
+						       NULL);
+		}
 		call_fib6_multipath_entry_notifiers(net,
 						    FIB_EVENT_ENTRY_DEL,
 						    rt,
-- 
2.24.1