From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@gmail.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 6/8] bonding: disallow setting nested bonding + ipsec offload
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 15:46:33 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f6f99418-fc81-6ddb-2a44-1b3d02179730@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14516.1625261184@famine>
On 7/3/21 6:26 AM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> 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.
>
I really agree with you.
I tried to test it but I couldn't because my NIC isn't working TX side
ipsec offload(ixgbevf).
(dev->ndo_dev_offload_okf() is called in only tx side.)
So, I didn't include that change.
Thanks a lot,
Taehee
> -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
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-03 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ 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 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 1/8] bonding: fix suspicious RCU usage in bond_ipsec_add_sa() 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 ` [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 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 4/8] ixgbevf: " 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 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 6/8] bonding: disallow setting nested bonding + ipsec offload Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 21:14 ` Jay Vosburgh
2021-07-03 6:37 ` Taehee Yoo
2021-07-02 21:26 ` Jay Vosburgh
2021-07-03 6:46 ` Taehee Yoo [this message]
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 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net 8/8] bonding: fix suspicious RCU usage in bond_ipsec_offload_ok() 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=f6f99418-fc81-6ddb-2a44-1b3d02179730@gmail.com \
--to=ap420073@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox