[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d527f86-da34-4025-8f9d-4865a20a55ff@6wind.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:53:07 +0200
From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
To: antony.antony@...unet.com, Steffen Klassert
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>, Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, devel@...ux-ipsec.org,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next v10 2/3] xfrm: Add dir validation to "out" data
path lookup
Le 11/04/2024 à 11:42, Antony Antony a écrit :
> Introduces validation for the x->dir attribute within the XFRM output
> data lookup path. If the configured direction does not match the expected
> direction, out, increment the XfrmOutDirError counter and drop the packet
> to ensure data integrity and correct flow handling.
>
> grep -vw 0 /proc/net/xfrm_stat
> XfrmOutPolError 2
> XfrmOutDirError 2
After thinking a bit more to the naming, what about
LINUX_MIB_XFRMOUTSTATEDIRERROR / XfrmOutStateDirError ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists