netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] Support defragmenting IPv(4|6) packets in BPF

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <nk6jl4hqougwim4sfgnm6rleh64dqad6qbqghbmjcfi6o7qrae@q3jtw34azrml>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 11:59:04 -0600
From: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>, 
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, 
	daniel@...earbox.net, dsahern@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] Support defragmenting IPv(4|6) packets in
 BPF

On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 04:53:15PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> wrote:
> > Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> writes:
> > As for the original question, that's answered by your point above: If
> > those two modules are the only ones that are likely to need this, then a
> > flag for each is fine by me - that was the key piece I was missing (I'm
> > not a netfilter expert, as you well know).
> 
> No problem, I was worried I was missing an important piece of kfunc
> plumbing :-)
> 
> You do raise a good point though.  With kfuncs, module is pinned.
> So, should a "please turn on defrag for this bpf_link" pin
> the defrag modules too?
> 
> For plain netfilter we don't do that, i.e. you can just do
> "rmmod nf_defrag_ipv4".  But I suspect that for the new bpf-link
> defrag we probably should grab a reference to prevent unwanted
> functionality breakage of the bpf prog.

Ack. Will add to v3.

Thanks,
Daniel