netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>
To: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
	dccp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] ipv4: First steps toward removing RTO_ONLINK
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 21:10:21 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2ee8fb0d-aeb4-5010-bc8c-16cbd6e88eff@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1650470610.git.gnault@redhat.com>

On 4/20/22 5:21 PM, Guillaume Nault wrote:
> RTO_ONLINK is a flag that allows to reduce the scope of route lookups.
> It's stored in a normally unused bit of the ->flowi4_tos field, in
> struct flowi4. However it has several problems:
> 
>  * This bit is also used by ECN. Although ECN bits are supposed to be
>    cleared before doing a route lookup, it happened that some code
>    paths didn't properly sanitise their ->flowi4_tos. So this mechanism
>    is fragile and we had bugs in the past where ECN bits slipped in and
>    could end up being erroneously interpreted as RTO_ONLINK.
> 
>  * A dscp_t type was recently introduced to ensure ECN bits are cleared
>    during route lookups. ->flowi4_tos is the most important structure
>    field to convert, but RTO_ONLINK prevents such conversion, as dscp_t
>    mandates that ECN bits (where RTO_ONLINK is stored) be zero.
> 
> Therefore we need to stop using RTO_ONLINK altogether. Fortunately
> RTO_ONLINK isn't a necessity. Instead of passing a flag in ->flowi4_tos
> to tell the route lookup function to restrict the scope, we can simply
> initialise the scope correctly.
> 

I believe the set looks ok. I think the fib test coverage in selftests
could use more tests to cover tos.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-04-22  3:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-20 23:21 [PATCH net-next 0/3] ipv4: First steps toward removing RTO_ONLINK Guillaume Nault
2022-04-20 23:21 ` [PATCH net-next 1/3] ipv4: Don't reset ->flowi4_scope in ip_rt_fix_tos() Guillaume Nault
2022-04-22  2:30   ` David Ahern
2022-04-22 10:53     ` Guillaume Nault
2022-04-22 14:40       ` David Ahern
2022-04-25 10:04         ` Guillaume Nault
2022-04-20 23:21 ` [PATCH net-next 2/3] ipv4: Avoid using RTO_ONLINK with ip_route_connect() Guillaume Nault
2022-04-22  2:32   ` David Ahern
2022-04-20 23:21 ` [PATCH net-next 3/3] ipv4: Initialise ->flowi4_scope properly in ICMP handlers Guillaume Nault
2022-04-22  3:08   ` David Ahern
2022-04-22  3:10 ` David Ahern [this message]
2022-04-22 11:02   ` [PATCH net-next 0/3] ipv4: First steps toward removing RTO_ONLINK Guillaume Nault
2022-04-22 12:50 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=2ee8fb0d-aeb4-5010-bc8c-16cbd6e88eff@kernel.org \
    --to=dsahern@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dccp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gnault@redhat.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).