From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] route: allow to route in a peer netns via lwt
 framework
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 14:24:04 +0200
Message-ID: <55B22E64.2010405@6wind.com>
References: <1437661349-17620-1-git-send-email-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> <55B101DC.6040609@cumulusnetworks.com> <55B1077F.1090501@6wind.com> <55B10D50.9010704@cumulusnetworks.com>
Reply-To: nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252;
	format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, tgraf@suug.ch
To: roopa <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:35240 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753551AbbGXMYH (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:24:07 -0400
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so26607172wib.0
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 05:24:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <55B10D50.9010704@cumulusnetworks.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Le 23/07/2015 17:50, roopa a =E9crit :
> On 7/23/15, 8:25 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>> Le 23/07/2015 17:01, roopa a =E9crit :
>>> On 7/23/15, 7:22 AM, Nicolas Dichtel wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>> +static inline u32 *lwt_netns_info(struct lwtunnel_state *lwtstate=
)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    return (u32 *)lwtstate->data;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline int skb_lwt_netns_info(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    if (skb->protocol =3D=3D htons(ETH_P_IP)) {
>>>> +        struct rtable *rt =3D (struct rtable *)skb_dst(skb);
>>>> +
>>>> +        if (rt && rt->rt_lwtstate)
>>>> +            return *lwt_netns_info(rt->rt_lwtstate);
>>>> +    } else if (skb->protocol =3D=3D htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) {
>>>> +        struct rt6_info *rt6 =3D (struct rt6_info *)skb_dst(skb);
>>>> +
>>>> +        if (rt6 && rt6->rt6i_lwtstate)
>>>> +            return *lwt_netns_info(rt6->rt6i_lwtstate);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +
>>>> +    return NETNSA_NSID_NOT_ASSIGNED;
>>>> +}
>>>>   #endif /* __NET_LWTUNNEL_H */
>>> since these apis' don't have to be netns specific,
>>> Can they just be named lwtunnel_get_state_data and skb_lwtunnel_sta=
te ?
>> They are specific to netns because lwtstate->data is interpreted as =
an u32 *.
>> But I agree that a test is missing against lwtstate->type to ensure =
that data
>> will be a nsid.
>>
> o ok..., the api's in lwtunnel.h today are not specific to an encap t=
ype.
> they are generic, so skb_lwtunnel_state() which returns struct lwtunn=
el_state
> could go here.
> the encap specific ones can go in the respective callers. Recently th=
omas added
> a similar
> skb_tunnel_info() for ip tunnels. I did  like to have a generic versi=
on of your
> skb_lwt_netns_info in lwtunnel.h. I could use it in my mpls output fu=
nc too.
Sure, but my goal was to not create a new .h file just for these two he=
lpers.
It's related to lwtunnel, thus I was thinking they can go here.


Regards,
Nicolas