netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/3] net/sched: Introduce action hash

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:   Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:52:38 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Ariel Levkovich <lariel@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/3] net/sched: Introduce action hash

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 11:47 AM Ariel Levkovich <lariel@...lanox.com> wrote:
>
> Allow setting a hash value to a packet for a future match.
>
> The action will determine the packet's hash result according to
> the selected hash type.
>
> The first option is to select a basic asymmetric l4 hash calculation
> on the packet headers which will either use the skb->hash value as
> if such was already calculated and set by the device driver, or it
> will perform the kernel jenkins hash function on the packet which will
> generate the result otherwise.
>
> The other option is for user to provide an BPF program which is
> dedicated to calculate the hash. In such case the program is loaded
> and used by tc to perform the hash calculation and provide it to
> the hash action to be stored in skb->hash field.
>
> The BPF option can be useful for future HW offload support of the hash
> calculation by emulating the HW hash function when it's different than
> the kernel's but yet we want to maintain consistency between the SW and
> the HW.

In previous discussion, people mentioned act_skbedit. If you have
a legitimate reason for adding a new action instead of simply extending
act_skbedit, you have to mention it here or in the cover letter.

Thanks.