From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roopa Prabhu Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is not null entry. Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:38:25 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1500562286-14312-1-git-send-email-liuhangbin@gmail.com> <20170724030907.GC2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com> <20170725000849.GD2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com> <01b1cd24-ab81-3276-f253-70eef20e550b@gmail.com> <20170725073202.GE2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com> <9e198c2a-c026-f4bd-f190-8d5a887efe7f@gmail.com> <64377a01-38df-6d43-16a4-401d426fb9b2@gmail.com> <2d75317c-160c-01c2-5a5b-bc6111c099c6@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Hangbin Liu , Cong Wang , network dev To: David Ahern Return-path: Received: from mail-ua0-f182.google.com ([209.85.217.182]:34842 "EHLO mail-ua0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751053AbdGZTi0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2017 15:38:26 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f182.google.com with SMTP id d29so115382864uai.2 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2017 12:38:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2d75317c-160c-01c2-5a5b-bc6111c099c6@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:00 PM, David Ahern wrote: > On 7/26/17 12:55 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:49 AM, David Ahern wrote: >>> On 7/26/17 12:27 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >>>> agreed...so looks like the check in v3 should be >>>> >>>> >>>> + if ( rt == net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry || >>>> + (rt->dst.error && >>>> + #ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_MULTIPLE_TABLES >>>> + rt != net->ipv6.ip6_prohibit_entry && >>>> + rt != net->ipv6.ip6_blk_hole_entry && >>>> +#endif >>>> + )) { >>>> err = rt->dst.error; >>>> ip6_rt_put(rt); >>>> goto errout; >>>> >>> >>> I don't think so. If I add a prohibit route and use the fibmatch >>> attribute, I want to see the route from the FIB that was matched. >> >> >> yes, exactly. wouldn't 'rt != net->ipv6.ip6_prohibit_entry' above let >> it fall through to the route fill code ? >> >> ah...but i guess you are saying that they will have rt6_info's of >> their own and will not match. got it. ack. >> > > This: > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c > index 4d30c96a819d..24de81c804c2 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c > @@ -3637,11 +3637,6 @@ static int inet6_rtm_getroute(struct sk_buff > *in_skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh, > dst = ip6_route_lookup(net, &fl6, 0); > > rt = container_of(dst, struct rt6_info, dst); > - if (rt->dst.error) { > - err = rt->dst.error; > - ip6_rt_put(rt); > - goto errout; > - } > > if (rt == net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry) { > err = rt->dst.error; > > Puts back the original behavior. In that case, only rt == null_entry > drops to the error path which is correct. All other rt values will drop > to rt6_fill_node and return rt data. yes, i thought so too and hence acked v1. But, following congs comment, realized that it may mask some real errors for fibmatch ? I just tested a case of unreachable route with just the above patch you posted, and I do get the error correctly. so, I guess you are saying all real errors for fibmatch will have "rt == net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry" and we should be ok. sounds good to me.