netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is not null entry.
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 08:08:49 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170725000849.GD2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpW4qj2N77QrCvt9jd6jhOGvyRye8eyBzzk+vXeUi_FaoQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:57:43PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 8:09 PM, Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do we still need this net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry check? How about remove all
> > the checks?
> 
> I believe you only need to check for rt->dst.error, no need to check against
> NULL or ip6_null_entry.
> 
> Take a look at other ip6_route_lookup() callers.

Yes, I saw it. That why I send v2 patch to check both rt->dst.error and
ip6_null_entry.

The question is the other two caller are rpfilter_lookup_reverse6() and
nft_fib6_eval(). From the code it looks these two caller only care about
device match.

         if (rt->rt6i_idev->dev == dev || (flags & XT_RPFILTER_LOOSE))
                 ret = true;

And the device would be lo if it is ip6_null_entry. So they just discard it.
I'm not familiar with netfilter, Please correct me if I make any mistake.

But what we want in inet6_rtm_getroute() and rt6_dump_route() is to
get/dump the route info. So we should get the info even it's unreachable or
prohibit.

That's why I think we should remove both rt->dst.error and ip6_null_entry
check in inet6_rtm_getroute(). And even further, remove the ip6_null_entry
check in rt6_dump_route().

What do you think?

Thanks
Hangbin

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-25  0:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-07-20 14:51 [PATCH net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is not null entry Hangbin Liu
2017-07-20 15:06 ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-20 15:23   ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-21 15:53     ` David Ahern
2017-07-21 18:42     ` Cong Wang
2017-07-21 21:53       ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-23  4:54         ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-24  3:09       ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-24 19:57         ` Cong Wang
2017-07-25  0:08           ` Hangbin Liu [this message]
2017-07-25  3:28             ` David Ahern
2017-07-25  7:32               ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-26 17:18                 ` David Ahern
2017-07-26 18:27                   ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-26 18:49                     ` David Ahern
2017-07-26 18:55                       ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-26 19:00                         ` David Ahern
2017-07-26 19:38                           ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-27 16:08                           ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-28  4:56                       ` Cong Wang
2017-07-28 11:04                         ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-28 15:10                         ` David Ahern
2017-07-28 17:13                           ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-28 17:39                             ` David Ahern
2017-07-28 19:52                               ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-29 14:41                                 ` David Ahern
2017-07-31 18:37                               ` Cong Wang
2017-07-31 18:40                                 ` David Ahern
2017-07-25 17:49             ` Cong Wang
2017-07-26  9:18               ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-21  3:47 ` [PATCHv2 net] ipv6: should not return rt->dst.error if it is prohibit or blk hole entry Hangbin Liu
2017-07-21 15:29   ` kbuild test robot
2017-07-21 16:34   ` kbuild test robot
2017-07-23  4:55 ` [PATCH net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is not null entry Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-24  2:28   ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-26  9:20 ` [PATCHv3 net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is prohibit entry Hangbin Liu
2017-07-26 17:09   ` David Ahern
2017-07-26 18:48     ` David Ahern
2017-07-27 13:48     ` Hangbin Liu
2017-07-27 16:25 ` [PATCHv4 net] ipv6: no need to check rt->dst.error when get route info Hangbin Liu
2017-07-27 18:03   ` David Ahern
2017-07-28 17:23     ` David Ahern
2017-07-27 19:52   ` Roopa Prabhu
2017-07-31 23:22   ` David Miller
2017-07-31 23:34     ` David Ahern
2017-07-31 23:39       ` David Miller

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=20170725000849.GD2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com \
    --to=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
    --cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).