netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next V5 2/5] bpf: bpf_fib_lookup return MTU value as output when looked up

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:   Mon, 02 Nov 2020 08:18:55 -0800
From:   John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        maze@...gle.com, lmb@...udflare.com, shaun@...era.io,
        Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, marek@...udflare.com,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, eyal.birger@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V5 2/5] bpf: bpf_fib_lookup return MTU value as
 output when looked up

David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/2/20 2:28 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> >>> index e6ceac3f7d62..01b2b17c645a 100644
> >>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> >>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> >>> @@ -2219,6 +2219,9 @@ union bpf_attr {
> >>>   *		* > 0 one of **BPF_FIB_LKUP_RET_** codes explaining why the
> >>>   *		  packet is not forwarded or needs assist from full stack
> >>>   *
> >>> + *		If lookup fails with BPF_FIB_LKUP_RET_FRAG_NEEDED, then the MTU
> >>> + *		was exceeded and result params->mtu contains the MTU.
> >>> + *  
> >>
> >> Do we need to hide this behind a flag? It seems otherwise you might confuse
> >> users. I imagine on error we could reuse the params arg, but now we changed
> >> the tot_len value underneath them?
> > 
> > The principle behind this bpf_fib_lookup helper, is that params (struct
> > bpf_fib_lookup) is used for both input and output (results). Almost
> > every field is change after the lookup. (For performance reasons this
> > is kept at 64 bytes (cache-line))  Thus, users of this helper already
> > expect/knows the contents of params have changed.
> > 
> 
> yes, that was done on purpose.

OK sounds good then. Thanks.

> 
> Jesper: you should remove the '(if requested check_mtu)' comment in the
> documentation. That is an internal flag only -- xdp is true, tc is false.