netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 7/8] tun: enable gso over UDP tunnel support.

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: <3da348e2-9404-4c6f-8b94-1c831ff7e6f9@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2025 10:04:22 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Willem de Bruijn
 <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
 Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Eugenio Pérez
 <eperezma@...hat.com>, Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>,
 Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 7/8] tun: enable gso over UDP tunnel support.

On 6/12/25 6:55 AM, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 7:46 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h b/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
>> index 287cdc81c939..79d53c7a1ebd 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/if_tun.h
>> @@ -93,6 +93,15 @@
>>  #define TUN_F_USO4     0x20    /* I can handle USO for IPv4 packets */
>>  #define TUN_F_USO6     0x40    /* I can handle USO for IPv6 packets */
>>
>> +/* I can handle TSO/USO for UDP tunneled packets */
>> +#define TUN_F_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO           0x080
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * I can handle TSO/USO for UDP tunneled packets requiring csum offload for
>> + * the outer header
>> + */
>> +#define TUN_F_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO_CSUM      0x100
>> +
> 
> Any reason we don't choose to use 0x40 and 0x60?

I just noticed I forgot to answer this one, I'm sorry.

0x40 is already in use (for TUN_F_USO6, as you can see above), and 0x60
is a bitmask, not a single bit. I used the lowest available free bits.

/P