netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] DSA: promisc on master, generic flow dissector code

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 11 May 2020 16:28:00 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, andrew@...n.ch,
        vivien.didelot@...il.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] DSA: promisc on master, generic flow
 dissector code



On 5/11/2020 1:20 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> 
> The initial purpose of this series was to implement the .flow_dissect
> method for sja1105 and for ocelot/felix. But on Felix this posed a
> problem, as the DSA headers were of different lengths on RX and on TX.
> A better solution than to just increase the smaller one was to also try
> to shrink the larger one, but in turn that required the DSA master to be
> put in promiscuous mode (which sja1105 also needed, for other reasons).
> 
> Finally, we can add the missing .flow_dissect methods to ocelot and
> sja1105 (as well as generalize the formula to other taggers as well).

On a separate note, do you have any systems for which it would be
desirable that the DSA standalone port implemented receive filtering? On
BCM7278 devices, the Ethernet MAC connected to the switch is always in
promiscuous mode, and so we rely on the switch not to flood the CPU port
unnecessarily with MC traffic (if nothing else), this is currently
implemented in our downstream kernel, but has not made it upstream yet,
previous attempt was here:

https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg544361.html

I would like to revisit that at some point.
-- 
Florian