From: David Lebrun <david.lebrun@uclouvain.be>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] ipv6: implement dataplane support for rthdr type 4 (Segment Routing Header)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 13:43:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58060AC7.1010501@uclouvain.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S35sU+aw3UvMTknj8SjJP4O=Q-9eVV3OC640Qzces_eE7w@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1877 bytes --]
On 10/17/2016 07:01 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> +struct ipv6_sr_hdr {
>> + __u8 nexthdr;
>> + __u8 hdrlen;
>> + __u8 type;
>> + __u8 segments_left;
>> + __u8 first_segment;
>> + __be16 flags;
>
> Bad alignment for 16 bit field could be unpleasant on some
> architectures. Might be better to split this into to u8's, defined
> flags are only in first eight bits anyway.
>
Will do
>> +config IPV6_SEG6
>> + bool "IPv6: Segment Routing support"
>> + depends on IPV6
>> + select CRYPTO_HMAC
>> + select CRYPTO_SHA1
>> + select CRYPTO_SHA256
>> + ---help---
>> + Experimental support for IPv6 Segment Routing dataplane as defined
>
> I don't think calling this experimental is relevant.
OK
>> + if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_COMPLETE)
>> + skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE;
>> +
> Because the packet is being changed? Would it make sense to update the
> checksum complete value based on the changes being made. Consider the
> case that the next hop is local to the host (someone may try to
> implement network virtualization this way).
>
Seems to make sense, I will try your suggestion
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6
>> + /* segment routing */
>> + if (hdr->type == IPV6_SRCRT_TYPE_4)
>> + return ipv6_srh_rcv(skb);
>> +#endif
>
> This doesn't belong in one of the switch statements in ipv6_rthdr_rcv?
>
From what I see, ipv6_rthdr_rcv was initially implemented to support
RH0, and then specific code was added at multiple points to handle MIP6.
The first switch already handles a specific case (i.e. segments_left ==
0), so the call to ipv6_srh_rcv() must happen before that. I choose not
to inline ipv6_srh_rcv into ipv6_rthdr_rcv as it would make the code
quite messy.
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-18 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-17 14:42 [PATCH 0/9] net: add support for IPv6 Segment Routing David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/9] ipv6: implement dataplane support for rthdr type 4 (Segment Routing Header) David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:57 ` David Miller
2016-10-17 15:04 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-17 17:01 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-18 11:43 ` David Lebrun [this message]
2016-10-20 13:04 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-20 15:47 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-17 17:31 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-17 14:42 ` [PATCH 2/9] ipv6: sr: add code base for control plane support of SR-IPv6 David Lebrun
2016-10-17 15:00 ` David Miller
2016-10-17 15:06 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-17 15:21 ` David Miller
2016-10-17 17:07 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-18 11:45 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:42 ` [PATCH 3/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH encapsulation and injection with lwtunnels David Lebrun
2016-10-17 17:17 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-18 11:47 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:42 ` [PATCH 4/9] ipv6: sr: add core files for SR HMAC support David Lebrun
2016-10-17 17:24 ` Tom Herbert
2016-10-18 12:07 ` David Lebrun
2016-10-19 13:20 ` zhuyj
2016-10-19 14:43 ` David Laight
2016-10-17 14:43 ` [PATCH 5/9] ipv6: sr: implement API to control SR HMAC structures David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:43 ` [PATCH 6/9] ipv6: sr: add calls to verify and insert HMAC signatures David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:43 ` [PATCH 7/9] ipv6: add source address argument for ipv6_push_nfrag_opts David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:43 ` [PATCH 8/9] ipv6: sr: add support for SRH injection through setsockopt David Lebrun
2016-10-17 14:43 ` [PATCH 9/9] ipv6: sr: add documentation file for per-interface sysctls David Lebrun
2016-10-17 15:09 ` [PATCH 0/9] net: add support for IPv6 Segment Routing David Laight
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=58060AC7.1010501@uclouvain.be \
--to=david.lebrun@uclouvain.be \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom@herbertland.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).