[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200216.183534.1660526654373190891.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2020 18:35:34 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: bpoirier@...ulusnetworks.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, mkubecek@...e.cz,
nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com, dsahern@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] ipv6: Fix nlmsg_flags when splitting a
multipath route
From: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...ulusnetworks.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:41:07 +0900
> When splitting an RTA_MULTIPATH request into multiple routes and adding the
> second and later components, we must not simply remove NLM_F_REPLACE but
> instead replace it by NLM_F_CREATE. Otherwise, it may look like the netlink
> message was malformed.
>
> For example,
> ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0
> ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 \
> nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0
> results in the following warnings:
> [ 1035.057019] IPv6: RTM_NEWROUTE with no NLM_F_CREATE or NLM_F_REPLACE
> [ 1035.057517] IPv6: NLM_F_CREATE should be set when creating new route
>
> This patch makes the nlmsg sequence look equivalent for __ip6_ins_rt() to
> what it would get if the multipath route had been added in multiple netlink
> operations:
> ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0
> ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0
> ip route append 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0
>
> Fixes: 27596472473a ("ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement")
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...ulusnetworks.com>
Applied and queued up for -stable.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists