From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next,v2 2/2] net: sched: add em_ipt ematch for
 calling xtables matches
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:48:08 +0200
Message-ID: <20180130104808.7a0c2ac1@jimi>
References: <1516985333-5156-1-git-send-email-eyal.birger@gmail.com>
        <1516985333-5156-3-git-send-email-eyal.birger@gmail.com>
        <20180126185019.tz45rkkjbrgizgln@salvia>
        <CAHsH6Gu8ZR699ndyB4UdbB9YSAEKTXyTRLx6EBpUBjSETrZ0ow@mail.gmail.com>
        <CAM_iQpW+3oQDaTQPmFf8sZYCTzRo7d4VTL0AKpPDFhV1F7c6Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        shmulik@metanetworks.com, Eyal Birger <eyal@metanetworks.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wr0-f195.google.com ([209.85.128.195]:46874 "EHLO
        mail-wr0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751219AbeA3IsT (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 30 Jan 2018 03:48:19 -0500
Received: by mail-wr0-f195.google.com with SMTP id g21so10166233wrb.13
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:48:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpW+3oQDaTQPmFf8sZYCTzRo7d4VTL0AKpPDFhV1F7c6Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 19:22:12 -0800
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 11:57 AM, Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso
> > <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:  
> >> Isn't there a way to reject the use of this from ->change()? ie.
> >> from control plane configuration.  
> >
> > I wasn't able to find a simple way of doing so:
> >
> > - AFAIU tc filters are detached from the qdiscs they operate on via
> > tcf_block instances
> >   that may be shared by different qdiscs. I was not able to be sure
> > that filters attached to ingress qdiscs via tcf_blocks at
> > configuration time cannot be later be shared
> >   with non ingress qdiscs. Nor was I able to find another classifier
> > making the ingress/egress
> >   distinction at configuration time.
> >
> > - ematches are not provided with 'ingress/egress' information at
> > 'change()' invocation, though
> >   of course the infrastructure could be extended to provide this,
> > given the distinction is available.
> >  
> 
> In the past you can check tp->q, but now we support shared tc filter
> block, so it is hard. I think your v1 is okay, which just silently
> passes the match on egress side. Or maybe we can just add a pr_info()
> unconditionally in em_ipt_change() saying only ingress is supported.

Thanks!

The motivation for allowing only ingress was to avoid skb modifications
on egress as when running the match on egress, skb->data must point to
the L3 header. Looking again at the calling flow e.g. from __dev_queue_xmit(),
I don't see a case where skb may be shared.

Similarly on ingress flow, sch_handle_ingress() modifies the skb, and
tc actions perform skb modification without share checking.

So as far as I can tell skb_pull() on the match is safe.
Is there a different code path I should be looking for?

If that is the case, perhaps the v1 approach supporting both directions
including skb_pull() can be resubmitted without the pr_notice once
net-next is open.

Eyal.