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
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 15 Jan 2020 13:58:20 -0700
From:   David Ahern <>
To:     Jiri Pirko <>
Cc:     Jay Vosburgh <>,
        Leon Romanovsky <>,
        Maor Gottlieb <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        Saeed Mahameed <>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <>,
        Jiri Pirko <>,
        Alex Rosenbaum <>,
        "" <>,
        Mark Zhang <>,
        Parav Pandit <>
Subject: Re: Expose bond_xmit_hash function

On 1/15/20 1:46 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 07:12:54PM CET, wrote:
>> On 1/15/20 11:04 AM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>>>> Something similar is needed for xdp and not necessarily tied to a
>>>> specific bond mode. Some time back I was using this as a prototype:
>>>> It is incomplete, but shows the intent - exporting bond_egress_slave for
>>>> use by other code to take a bond device and return an egress leg.
>>> 	This seems much less awful, but would it make bonding a
>>> dependency on pretty much everything?
>> The intent is to hide the bond details beyond the general "a bond has
>> multiple egress paths and we need to pick one". ie., all of the logic
>> and data structures are still private.
>> Exporting the function for use by modules is the easy part.
>> Making it accessible to core code (XDP) means ??? Obviously not a
>> concern when bond is built in but the usual case is a module. One
>> solution is to repeat the IPv6 stub format; not great from an indirect
>> call perspective. I have not followed the work on INDIRECT_CALL to know
>> if that mitigates the concern about the stub when bond is a module.
> Why it can't be an ndo as I previously suggested in this thread? It is
> not specific to bond, others might like to fillup this ndo too (team,
> ovs, bridge).

Sure, that is an option to try. I can not remember if I explored that
option previously; too much time has passed.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists