netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] Unmask upper DSCP bits

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: <Zs30sZynSw53zQfW@shredder.mtl.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 18:45:53 +0300
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>
To: Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dsahern@...nel.org,
	ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, martin.lau@...ux.dev,
	john.fastabend@...il.com, steffen.klassert@...unet.com,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/12] Unmask upper DSCP bits - part 2

On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 03:47:05PM +0200, Guillaume Nault wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 02:18:01PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > tl;dr - This patchset continues to unmask the upper DSCP bits in the
> > IPv4 flow key in preparation for allowing IPv4 FIB rules to match on
> > DSCP. No functional changes are expected. Part 1 was merged in commit
> > ("Merge branch 'unmask-upper-dscp-bits-part-1'").
> > 
> > The TOS field in the IPv4 flow key ('flowi4_tos') is used during FIB
> > lookup to match against the TOS selector in FIB rules and routes.
> > 
> > It is currently impossible for user space to configure FIB rules that
> > match on the DSCP value as the upper DSCP bits are either masked in the
> > various call sites that initialize the IPv4 flow key or along the path
> > to the FIB core.
> > 
> > In preparation for adding a DSCP selector to IPv4 and IPv6 FIB rules, we
> 
> Hum, do you plan to add a DSCP selector for IPv6? That shouldn't be
> necessary as IPv6 already takes all the DSCP bits into account. Also we
> don't need to keep any compatibility with the legacy TOS interpretation,
> as it has never been defined nor used in IPv6.

Yes. I want to add the DSCP selector for both families so that user
space would not need to use different selectors for different families.
It's implemented in the patches I previously shared:

https://github.com/idosch/linux/commit/a3289a6838a0d0e6e0a30a61132bdce3d2f71a3c.patch
https://github.com/idosch/linux/commit/ff5dd634fb278431b58437654d7f65b57fd4ae4b.patch
https://github.com/idosch/linux/commit/3060ecb534475eadabfa1d419dd64804f0bd0148.patch
https://github.com/idosch/linux/commit/12ddbce4f519b42477ea1e130b6d2bab1cca137c.patch

> 
> > need to make sure the entire DSCP value is present in the IPv4 flow key.
> > This patchset continues to unmask the upper DSCP bits, but this time in
> > the output route path.
>