From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 6/8] bonding: disallow setting nested bonding + ipsec offload
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:26:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14516.1625261184@famine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210702142648.7677-7-ap420073@gmail.com>
Taehee Yoo <ap420073@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>@@ -479,8 +481,9 @@ static bool bond_ipsec_offload_ok(struct sk_buff *skb, struct xfrm_state *xs)
> if (BOND_MODE(bond) != BOND_MODE_ACTIVEBACKUP)
> return true;
Not a question about this patch, but isn't the "return true"
above incorrect (i.e., should return false)? I understand that the
ipsec offload is only available for active-backup mode, but the test
above will return true for all modes other than active-backup.
-J
>- if (!(slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops
>- && slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_offload_ok)) {
>+ if (!slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops ||
>+ !slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_offload_ok ||
>+ netif_is_bond_master(slave_dev)) {
> slave_warn(bond_dev, slave_dev, "%s: no slave xdo_dev_offload_ok\n", __func__);
> return false;
> }
>--
>2.17.1
>
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh at canonical.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
To: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@gmail.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, vfalico@gmail.com,
andy@greyhouse.net, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com,
anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com, jarod@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 6/8] bonding: disallow setting nested bonding + ipsec offload
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:26:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14516.1625261184@famine> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210702142648.7677-7-ap420073@gmail.com>
Taehee Yoo <ap420073@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>@@ -479,8 +481,9 @@ static bool bond_ipsec_offload_ok(struct sk_buff *skb, struct xfrm_state *xs)
> if (BOND_MODE(bond) != BOND_MODE_ACTIVEBACKUP)
> return true;
Not a question about this patch, but isn't the "return true"
above incorrect (i.e., should return false)? I understand that the
ipsec offload is only available for active-backup mode, but the test
above will return true for all modes other than active-backup.
-J
>- if (!(slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops
>- && slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_offload_ok)) {
>+ if (!slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops ||
>+ !slave_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_offload_ok ||
>+ netif_is_bond_master(slave_dev)) {
> slave_warn(bond_dev, slave_dev, "%s: no slave xdo_dev_offload_ok\n", __func__);
> return false;
> }
>--
>2.17.1
>
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@canonical.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-02 21:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-02 14:26 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 0/8] net: fix bonding ipsec offload problems Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 1/8] bonding: fix suspicious RCU usage in bond_ipsec_add_sa() Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 2/8] bonding: fix null dereference " Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 3/8] net: netdevsim: use xso.real_dev instead of xso.dev in callback functions of struct xfrmdev_ops Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 4/8] ixgbevf: " Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 5/8] bonding: fix suspicious RCU usage in bond_ipsec_del_sa() Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 6/8] bonding: disallow setting nested bonding + ipsec offload Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 21:14 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jay Vosburgh
2021-07-02 21:14 ` Jay Vosburgh
2021-07-03 6:37 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Taehee Yoo
2021-07-03 6:37 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 21:26 ` Jay Vosburgh [this message]
2021-07-02 21:26 ` Jay Vosburgh
2021-07-03 6:46 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Taehee Yoo
2021-07-03 6:46 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 7/8] bonding: Add struct bond_ipesc to manage SA Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 8/8] bonding: fix suspicious RCU usage in bond_ipsec_offload_ok() Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 14:26 ` Taehee Yoo
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=14516.1625261184@famine \
--to=jay.vosburgh@canonical.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/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.