netdev - Re: Need of advice for XDP sockets on top of the interfaces behind a Linux bonding device

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: <CAJEV1igULtS-e0sBd3G=P1AHr8nqTd3kT+0xc8BL2vAfDM_TuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2024 05:58:55 +0200
From: Pavel Vazharov <pavel@...e.net>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Need of advice for XDP sockets on top of the interfaces behind a
 Linux bonding device

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 9:28 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Pavel Vazharov <pavel@...e.net> writes:
>
> > 3. If the above scheme is supposed to work then is the bonding logic
> > (LACP management traffic) affected by the access pattern of the XDP
> > sockets? I mean, the order of Rx/Tx operations on the XDP sockets or
> > something like that.
>
> Well, it will be up to your application to ensure that it is not. The
> XDP program will run before the stack sees the LACP management traffic,
> so you will have to take some measure to ensure that any such management
> traffic gets routed to the stack instead of to the DPDK application. My
> immediate guess would be that this is the cause of those warnings?
>
> -Toke
Thank you for the response.
I already checked the XDP program.
It redirects particular pools of IPv4 (TCP or UDP) traffic to the application.
Everything else is passed to the Linux kernel.
However, I'll check it again. Just to be sure.