netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 02/15] net: build socket infrastructure for QUIC protocol

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: <0b65e74c-71bb-494d-9b05-0ee20f27e840@samba.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 15:17:33 +0100
From: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc: network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, quic@...ts.linux.dev,
 davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
 Moritz Buhl <mbuhl@...nbsd.org>, Tyler Fanelli <tfanelli@...hat.com>,
 Pengtao He <hepengtao@...omi.com>, Thomas Dreibholz <dreibh@...ula.no>,
 linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
 Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...nel.org>, Paulo Alcantara <pc@...guebit.com>,
 Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>, kernel-tls-handshake@...ts.linux.dev,
 Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
 Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>, Steve Dickson
 <steved@...hat.com>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
 Alexander Aring <aahringo@...hat.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
 Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>, John Ericson <mail@...nericson.me>,
 Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, "D . Wythe"
 <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
 illiliti <illiliti@...tonmail.com>, Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
 Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
 Daniel Stenberg <daniel@...x.se>,
 Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 02/15] net: build socket infrastructure for
 QUIC protocol

Am 30.10.25 um 15:13 schrieb Xin Long:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 7:29 AM Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org> wrote:
>>
>> Am 29.10.25 um 20:57 schrieb Xin Long:
>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 12:22 PM Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Xin,
>>>>
>>>>> This patch lays the groundwork for QUIC socket support in the kernel.
>>>>> It defines the core structures and protocol hooks needed to create
>>>>> QUIC sockets, without implementing any protocol behavior at this stage.
>>>>>
>>>>> Basic integration is included to allow building the module via
>>>>> CONFIG_IP_QUIC=m.
>>>>>
>>>>> This provides the scaffolding necessary for adding actual QUIC socket
>>>>> behavior in follow-up patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pengtao He <hepengtao@...omi.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> +module_init(quic_init);
>>>>> +module_exit(quic_exit);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("net-pf-" __stringify(PF_INET) "-proto-261");
>>>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("net-pf-" __stringify(PF_INET6) "-proto-261");
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't this use MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(PF_INET, IPPROTO_QUIC)
>>>> instead?
>>>>
>>> Hi, Stefan,
>>>
>>> If we switch to using MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(), we still need to
>>> keep using the numeric value 261:
>>>
>>>     MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(PF_INET, 261);
>>>     MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(PF_INET6, 261);
>>>
>>> IPPROTO_QUIC is defined as an enum, not a macro. Since
>>> MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO() relies on __stringify(proto), it can’t
>>> stringify enum values correctly, and it would generate:
>>>
>>>     alias:          net-pf-10-proto-IPPROTO_QUIC
>>>     alias:          net-pf-2-proto-IPPROTO_QUIC
>>
>> Yes, now I remember...
>>
>> Maybe we can use something like this:
>>
>> -  IPPROTO_QUIC = 261,          /* A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport */
>> +#define __IPPROTO_QUIC 261     /* A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport */
>> +  IPPROTO_QUIC = __IPPROTO_QUIC,
>>
>> and then
>>
>> MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(PF_INET, __IPPROTO_QUIC)
>>
>> In order to make things clearer.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
> That might be a good idea to make things clearer later on.
> 
> But for now, I’d prefer not to add something special just for QUIC in
> include/uapi/linux/in.h.  We can revisit it later together with SCTP,
> L2TP, and SMC to keep things consistent.

Ok, maybe this would do it for now?

MODULE_ALIAS_NET_PF_PROTO(PF_INET, 261); /* IPPROTO_QUIC == 261 */

I'll do the same for IPPROTO_SMBDIRECT...

metze