All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: ja@ssi.bg
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org,
	yuehaibing@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 0/7] net: dst_confirm replacement
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:13:39 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170130.101339.2050288140097606206.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485613578-19973-1-git-send-email-ja@ssi.bg>

From: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 16:26:11 +0200

> 	This patchset addresses the problem of neighbour
> confirmation where received replies from one nexthop
> can cause confirmation of different nexthop when using
> the same dst. Thanks to YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
> for tracking the dst->pending_confirm problem.
> 
> 	Sockets can obtain cached output route. Such
> routes can be to known nexthop (rt_gateway=IP) or to be
> used simultaneously for different nexthop IPs by different
> subnet prefixes (nh->nh_scope = RT_SCOPE_HOST, rt_gateway=0).
> 
> 	At first look, there are more problems:
> 
> - dst_confirm() sets flag on dst and not on dst->path,
> as result, indication is lost when XFRM is used
> 
> - DNAT can change the nexthop, so the really used nexthop is
> not confirmed
> 
> 	So, the following solution is to avoid using
> dst->pending_confirm.

For the most part this series looks good to me, nice work.

> - I failed to understand the CXGB* code, I see dst_confirm()
> calls but I'm not sure dst_neigh_output() was called. For now
> I just removed the dst->pending_confirm flag and left all
> dst_confirm() calls there. Any better idea?

It is trying to manage the dst and neigh state for TCP connections
managed by it's offload engine.  So you will not therefore see any
actual packet output for the sessions it is performing confirmation
for.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: ja@ssi.bg
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org,
	yuehaibing@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 0/7] net: dst_confirm replacement
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 15:13:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170130.101339.2050288140097606206.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485613578-19973-1-git-send-email-ja@ssi.bg>

From: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 16:26:11 +0200

> 	This patchset addresses the problem of neighbour
> confirmation where received replies from one nexthop
> can cause confirmation of different nexthop when using
> the same dst. Thanks to YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
> for tracking the dst->pending_confirm problem.
> 
> 	Sockets can obtain cached output route. Such
> routes can be to known nexthop (rt_gateway=IP) or to be
> used simultaneously for different nexthop IPs by different
> subnet prefixes (nh->nh_scope = RT_SCOPE_HOST, rt_gateway=0).
> 
> 	At first look, there are more problems:
> 
> - dst_confirm() sets flag on dst and not on dst->path,
> as result, indication is lost when XFRM is used
> 
> - DNAT can change the nexthop, so the really used nexthop is
> not confirmed
> 
> 	So, the following solution is to avoid using
> dst->pending_confirm.

For the most part this series looks good to me, nice work.

> - I failed to understand the CXGB* code, I see dst_confirm()
> calls but I'm not sure dst_neigh_output() was called. For now
> I just removed the dst->pending_confirm flag and left all
> dst_confirm() calls there. Any better idea?

It is trying to manage the dst and neigh state for TCP connections
managed by it's offload engine.  So you will not therefore see any
actual packet output for the sessions it is performing confirmation
for.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-01-30 15:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-28 14:26 [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 0/7] net: dst_confirm replacement Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 1/7] sock: add sk_dst_pending_confirm flag Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 2/7] net: add dst_pending_confirm flag to skbuff Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 3/7] sctp: add dst_pending_confirm flag Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-30 14:45   ` Neil Horman
2017-01-30 14:45     ` Neil Horman
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 4/7] tcp: replace dst_confirm with sk_dst_confirm Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-29 19:27   ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-29 19:27     ` Eric Dumazet
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 5/7] net: add confirm_neigh method to dst_ops Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 6/7] net: use dst_confirm_neigh for UDP, RAW, ICMP, L2TP Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26 ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 7/7] net: pending_confirm is not used anymore Julian Anastasov
2017-01-28 14:26   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-30 15:13 ` David Miller [this message]
2017-01-30 15:13   ` [PATCHv2 RFC net-next 0/7] net: dst_confirm replacement David Miller
2017-01-31 21:53   ` Julian Anastasov
2017-01-31 21:53     ` Julian Anastasov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170130.101339.2050288140097606206.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ja@ssi.bg \
    --cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.