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  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:   Fri, 11 Sep 2020 12:48:37 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, vivien.didelot@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] net: dsa: set
 configure_vlan_while_not_filtering to true by default



On 9/11/2020 12:39 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/11/2020 11:35 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:23:28AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>> On 9/11/2020 8:43 AM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>>>>> The slightly confusing part is that a vlan_filtering=1 bridge 
>>>>> accepts the
>>>>> default_pvid either tagged or untagged whereas a vlan_filtering=0 
>>>>> bridge
>>>>> does not, except for DHCP for instance. I would have to add a br0.1 
>>>>> 802.1Q
>>>>> upper to take care of the default_pvid being egress tagged on the 
>>>>> CPU port.
>>>>>
>>>>> We could solve this in the DSA receive path, or the Broadcom tag 
>>>>> receive
>>>>> path as you say since that is dependent on the tagging format and 
>>>>> switch
>>>>> properties.
>>>>>
>>>>> With Broadcom tags enabled now, all is well since we can differentiate
>>>>> traffic from different source ports using that 4 bytes tag.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where this broke was when using a 802.1Q separation because all 
>>>>> frames that
>>>>> egressed the CPU were egress tagged and it was no longer possible to
>>>>> differentiate whether they came from the LAN group in VID 1 or the 
>>>>> WAN group
>>>>> in VID 2. But all of this should be a thing of the past now, ok, 
>>>>> all is
>>>>> clear again now.
>>>>
>>>> Or we could do this, what do you think?
>>>
>>> Yes, this would be working, and I just tested it with the following 
>>> delta on
>>> top of my b53 patch:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c
>>> b/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c
>>> index 46ac8875f870..73507cff3bc4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/b53/b53_common.c
>>> @@ -1427,7 +1427,7 @@ void b53_vlan_add(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>>>                          untagged = true;
>>>
>>>                  vl->members |= BIT(port);
>>> -               if (untagged)
>>> +               if (untagged && !dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, port))
>>>                          vl->untag |= BIT(port);
>>>                  else
>>>                          vl->untag &= ~BIT(port);
>>> @@ -1465,7 +1465,7 @@ int b53_vlan_del(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
>>>                  if (pvid == vid)
>>>                          pvid = b53_default_pvid(dev);
>>>
>>> -               if (untagged)
>>> +               if (untagged && !dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, port))
>>>                          vl->untag &= ~(BIT(port));
>>>
>>>                  b53_set_vlan_entry(dev, vid, vl);
>>>
>>> and it works, thanks!
>>>
>>
>> I'm conflicted. So you prefer having the CPU port as egress-tagged?
> 
> I do, because I realized that some of the switches we support are still 
> configured in DSA_TAG_NONE mode because the CPU port they chose is not 
> Broadcom tag capable and there is an user out there who cares a lot 
> about that case not to "break".
> 
>>
>> Also, I think I'll also experiment with a version of this patch that is
>> local to the DSA RX path. The bridge people may not like it, and as far
>> as I understand, only DSA has this situation where pvid-tagged traffic
>> may end up with a vlan tag on ingress.
> 
> OK so something along the lines of: port is bridged, and bridge has 
> vlan_filtering=0 and switch does egress tagging and VID is bridge's 
> default_pvid then pop the tag?
> 
> Should this be a helper function that is utilized by the relevant tagger 
> drivers or do you want this in dsa_switch_rcv()?

The two drivers that appear to be untagging the CPU port unconditionally 
are b53 and kzs9477.
-- 
Florian

Powered by blists - more mailing lists