netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v8 1/2] vxlan: Add nolocalbypass option to vxlan.

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: Thu, 11 May 2023 18:27:45 +0300
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To: Vladimir Nikishkin <vladimir@...ishkin.pw>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
	eng.alaamohamedsoliman.am@...il.com, gnault@...hat.com,
	razor@...ckwall.org, idosch@...dia.com, liuhangbin@...il.com,
	eyal.birger@...il.com, jtoppins@...hat.com, shuah@...nel.org,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 1/2] vxlan: Add nolocalbypass option to vxlan.

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 11:22:09AM +0800, Vladimir Nikishkin wrote:
> If a packet needs to be encapsulated towards a local destination IP,
> the packet will be injected into the Rx path as if it was received by
> the target VXLAN device without undergoing encapsulation. If such a
> device does not exist, the packet will be dropped.
> 
> There are scenarios where we do not want to drop such packets and
> instead want to let them be encapsulated and locally received by a user
> space program that post-processes these VXLAN packets.
> 
> To that end, add a new VXLAN device attribute that controls whether such
> packets are dropped or not. When set ("localbypass") packets are
> dropped and when unset ("nolocalbypass") the packets are encapsulated
> and locally delivered to the listening user space application. Default
> to "localbypass" to maintain existing behavior.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Nikishkin <vladimir@...ishkin.pw>

The code looks fine to me, so:

Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>

But the commit message needs to be aligned to the code changes made in
this version (which need to be noted the under the '---' [1]). I
suggest:

"
If a packet needs to be encapsulated towards a local destination IP, the
packet will undergo a "local bypass" and be injected into the Rx path as
if it was received by the target VXLAN device without undergoing
encapsulation. If such a device does not exist, the packet will be
dropped.

There are scenarios where we do not want to perform such a bypass, but
instead want the packet to be encapsulated and locally received by a
user space program for post-processing.

To that end, add a new VXLAN device attribute that controls whether a
"local bypass" is performed or not. Default to performing a bypass to
maintain existing behavior.
"

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#the-canonical-patch-format