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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Tue, 12 May 2020 02:52:25 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] DSA: promisc on master, generic flow
 dissector code

On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 02:28, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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

Yes, CPU filtering of traffic (not just multicast) is one of the
problems we're facing. I'll take a look at your patches and maybe I'll
pick them up.

Thanks,
-Vladimir