netdev - Re: [PATCH net V3 1/3] bonding: implement xdo_dev_state

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: <ZrHisKjAQPtbBJFa@Laptop-X1>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 16:45:36 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jay Vosburgh <jv@...sburgh.net>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>,
	Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net V3 1/3] bonding: implement xdo_dev_state_free and
 call it after deletion

On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 08:03:55AM +0300, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> From: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
> 
> Add this implementation for bonding, so hardware resources can be
> freed after xfrm state is deleted.
> 
> And call it when deleting all SAs from old active real interface.
> 
> Fixes: 9a5605505d9c ("bonding: Add struct bond_ipesc to manage SA")
> Signed-off-by: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> index 1cd92c12e782..eb5e43860670 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> @@ -581,6 +581,8 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa_all(struct bonding *bond)
>  				   __func__);
>  		} else {
>  			slave->dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_delete(ipsec->xs);
> +			if (slave->dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free)
> +				slave->dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free(ipsec->xs);
>  		}
>  		ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev = NULL;
>  	}
> @@ -588,6 +590,35 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa_all(struct bonding *bond)
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
>  }
>  
> +static void bond_ipsec_free_sa(struct xfrm_state *xs)
> +{
> +	struct net_device *bond_dev = xs->xso.dev;
> +	struct net_device *real_dev;
> +	struct bonding *bond;
> +	struct slave *slave;
> +
> +	if (!bond_dev)
> +		return;
> +
> +	rcu_read_lock();
> +	bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
> +	slave = rcu_dereference(bond->curr_active_slave);
> +	real_dev = slave ? slave->dev : NULL;
> +	rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> +	if (!slave)
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!xs->xso.real_dev)
> +		return;
> +
> +	WARN_ON(xs->xso.real_dev != real_dev);
> +
> +	if (real_dev && real_dev->xfrmdev_ops &&
> +	    real_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free)
> +		real_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_free(xs);

Do we need to check netif_is_bond_master(slave->dev) here?

Thanks
Hangbin