From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A52C433EF for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 18:19:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1377493AbiBDSTp (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Feb 2022 13:19:45 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44164 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1357678AbiBDSTp (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Feb 2022 13:19:45 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd30.google.com (mail-io1-xd30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9C31C06173D for ; Fri, 4 Feb 2022 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd30.google.com with SMTP id y84so8485167iof.0 for ; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BhArQkxbtN0pvvjCBG0OYL1pBDNdr/svZIAn025HybE=; b=AHG7JqXHFg1WzW9OKdp+766xUIWPFbqNWGbrGAAE28jVoghvIysHSbP0hxh6cX4CkK 0cP/lUMizivvyPybQPZT3d/ehIPuWhOheYV+dNMmUa/QjuyEW5LYdYTmbu4upcDqMrNK JD71+zYd6vUAB3OhQZaRTJqT/7VB50czYVJxw= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BhArQkxbtN0pvvjCBG0OYL1pBDNdr/svZIAn025HybE=; b=6QWDkBJKfESCssxFfrgI9rtgRnCzTkRn/AGRgxpbvmD0J14RKLcjZ8JhI9Z8bFXel6 KTpDkF/8wPNHNUWN3nQfYKXr3V+LqmECpXjFOSulmkeNhhLRvlxxBUep9P4uP9xpIwKl i8tqfOahRnOxflsUqDI03uhargjYwo5GkVUiqk9SVHcHqMLDncNcZ2C5M8vfkAeJ4JES WNKh59pvtc5HsuB7KIvwi4+YuX2LpXhTTH71WfCJMxH5TTotBnOMVtdddVcryYc2tS9o 1vCg5y8ObHAx/GBhTubIIClzDSUx/MHQZywUQzq0yRBURgDuTKb8nrqbAYO3X0OYnq4u z/TQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328J3FkKogTc5z0NcuLX688cE8AGlMxKLNXW4JYey5Oov+K4pd7 RZnf+Vgj874fHVnAgL37gY9qmQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTFIthmhWE16ytzf8DU+RjpHZFziYmvkFxyOqMMkX3YZK8OsBmjThsALoz+nyAsAMrY5MdaQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:2a49:: with SMTP id k9mr172607iov.83.1643998784351; Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.128] ([71.205.29.0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a2sm1355546ilj.35.2022.02.04.10.19.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Feb 2022 10:19:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] ipv4: Reject routes specifying ECN bits in rtm_tos To: Guillaume Nault , David Miller , Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , David Ahern , =?UTF-8?Q?Toke_H=c3=b8iland-J=c3=b8rgense?= =?UTF-8?Q?n?= , Shuah Khan , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Russell Strong , Dave Taht , Shuah Khan References: From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 11:19:43 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On 2/4/22 6:58 AM, Guillaume Nault wrote: > Use the new dscp_t type to replace the fc_tos field of fib_config, to > ensure IPv4 routes aren't influenced by ECN bits when configured with > non-zero rtm_tos. > > Before this patch, IPv4 routes specifying an rtm_tos with some of the > ECN bits set were accepted. However they wouldn't work (never match) as > IPv4 normally clears the ECN bits with IPTOS_RT_MASK before doing a FIB > lookup (although a few buggy code paths don't). > > After this patch, IPv4 routes specifying an rtm_tos with any ECN bit > set is rejected. > > Note: IPv6 routes ignore rtm_tos altogether, any rtm_tos is accepted, > but treated as if it were 0. > > Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault > --- > Shuah, FYI, this is the patch I was refering to in our discussion about > testing invalid tos values: > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20220202232555.GC15826@pc-4.home/ > This give me context. Thank you. thanks, -- Shuah