netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 06/12] ice: Implement basic eswitch bridge setup

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]

Message-ID: <20230626103542.68800299@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 10:35:42 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
 pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Wojciech
 Drewek <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>, jiri@...nulli.us, ivecera@...hat.com,
 simon.horman@...igine.com, Sujai Buvaneswaran
 <sujai.buvaneswaran@...el.com>, Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 06/12] ice: Implement basic eswitch bridge
 setup

On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 16:26:15 +0200 Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> We found out that adding VF and corresponding port representor to the
> bridge cause loop in the bridge. Packets are looping through the bridge.
> I know that it isn't valid configuration, howevere, it can happen and
> after that the server is quite unstable.
> 
> Does mellanox validate the port for this scenario? Or we should assume
> that user will add port wisely? I was looking at your code, but didn't
> find that. You are using NETDEV_PRECHANGEUPPER, do you think we should
> validate if user is trying to add VF when his PR is currently added?

Can you try to plug two ends of a veth into a bridge and see if the
same thing happens?  My instinct is that this is a classic bridge
problem and the answer is STP.