Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Fix vti use case with oif in dst lookups for IPv6

[Hajime Tazaki <thehajime@gmail.com>]

At Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:27:36 -0600,
David Ahern wrote:
> 
> [1  <text/plain; windows-1252 (7bit)>]
> On 10/9/15 1:17 AM, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/net/ipv6/xfrm6_policy.c b/net/ipv6/xfrm6_policy.c
> >>> index 30caa289c5db..5cedfda4b241 100644
> >>> --- a/net/ipv6/xfrm6_policy.c
> >>> +++ b/net/ipv6/xfrm6_policy.c
> >>> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ static struct dst_entry *xfrm6_dst_lookup(struct net *net, int tos, int oif,
> >>>
> >>>   	memset(&fl6, 0, sizeof(fl6));
> >>>   	fl6.flowi6_oif = oif;
> >>> +	fl6.flowi6_flags = FLOWI_FLAG_SKIP_NH_OIF;
> >>>   	memcpy(&fl6.daddr, daddr, sizeof(fl6.daddr));
> >>>   	if (saddr)
> >>>   		memcpy(&fl6.saddr, saddr, sizeof(fl6.saddr));
> >>
> >> I found that this fix is still not sufficient with the mip6
> >> (Mobile IPv6) use case.
> >
> > It does not even fix the vti case. The behaviour of the vti devices is
> > the same, with and without the patch.
> >
> 
> The attached patch applied to Linus' tree works for me. Currently the 
> above change is not in his tree, so I added it to this patch. Once you 
> confirm that it works for you I'll create the delta-patch for net and 
> send out.

I gave it a try but without any luck unfortunately.
I may need to look carefully what mip6 does here.

the code path where I'm looking at for MH packet (raw socket
with IPPROTO_MH) is:

#0  ip6_route_output (net=0x7ffff3a40a40 <rumpns_init_net>, sk=0x7ffff30b5c50, fl6=0x7ffff0ed2fe0) at net/ipv6/route.c:1195
#1  0x00007ffff35d155f in ip6_dst_lookup_tail (net=0x7ffff3a40a40 <rumpns_init_net>, sk=0x7ffff30b5c50, dst=0x7ffff0ed2f18, fl6=0x7ffff0ed2fe0)
    at net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:929
#2  0x00007ffff35d1707 in ip6_dst_lookup_flow (sk=0x7ffff30b5c50, fl6=0x7ffff0ed2fe0, final_dst=0x0) at net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:1024
#3  0x00007ffff36199f7 in rawv6_sendmsg (sk=0x7ffff30b5c50, msg=0x7ffff0ed3320, len=32) at net/ipv6/raw.c:872
#4  0x00007ffff3526d21 in inet_sendmsg (sock=0x7ffff30b5810, msg=0x7ffff0ed3320, size=32) at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:737
#5  0x00007ffff338dc8a in sock_sendmsg_nosec (msg=0x7ffff0ed3320, sock=0x7ffff30b5810) at net/socket.c:610
#6  sock_sendmsg (sock=0x7ffff30b5810, msg=0x7ffff0ed3320) at net/socket.c:620


which (*dst)->error of ip6_route_output gives -22 (EINVAL).

I will be back once I got any findings.

-- Hajime