netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net/mlx5e: Prevent entering switchdev mode with inconsistent netns

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: <95604c0f-558b-401c-8c79-ef5511ddb4a4@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 09:12:47 +0800
From: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David
 S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, "Leon
 Romanovsky" <leon@...nel.org>, Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Gal Pressman
	<gal@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] net/mlx5e: Prevent entering switchdev mode with
 inconsistent netns



On 9/12/2025 8:11 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 15:48:24 +0800 Jianbo Liu wrote:
>>>> There is a requirement from customer who wants to manage openvswitch in
>>>> a container. But he can't complete the steps (changing eswitch and
>>>> configuring OVS) in the container if the netns are different.
>>>
>>> You're preventing a configuration which you think is "bad" (for a
>>> reason unknown). How is _rejecting_ a config enabling you to fulfill
>>> some "customer requirement" which sounds like having all interfaces
>>> in a separate ns?
>>
>> My apologies, I wasn't clear. The problem is specific to the OVS control
>> plane. ovs-vsctl cannot manage the switch if the PF uplink and VF
>> representors are in different namespaces. When the PF is in a container
>> while the devlink instance is bound to the host, enabling switchdev
>> creates this exact split: the PF uplink stays in the container, while
>> the VF representors are created on the host.
> 
> So you're saying the user can mess up the configuration in a way that'd
> prevent them from using OVS. No strong objection to the patch (assuming
> commit message is improved), but I don't see how this is a fix.

Yes. We are preventing a configuration that breaks the OVS control plane 
for this specific use case. Thank you for the review. I will update the 
commit message.