From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>,
Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 1/4] net/sched: user-space can't set unknown tcfa_action values
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 16:40:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e2a29da9514e38ab2caef2f2a592780e60ceda4c.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <79b9d1a7-64ea-e385-1dcb-1f38955a01dd@mojatatu.com>
On Tue, 2018-07-31 at 09:53 -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> BTW, I asked this earlier and Jiri said it was addressed in patch 2.
> I just looked again and i may be missing something basic:
> Lets say tomorrow in a new kernel we add new TC_ACT_XXX that then gets
> exposed to uapi - so user space tc is updated.
> You then use the new tc specifying TC_ACT_XXX policy on kernel with your
> changes.
> If i read correctly because TC_ACT_XXX is out of bounds for current
> kernel(which has your changes) you will fix it to be UNSPEC, no?
You are right.
If we choose to reject unknown opcodes, such user-space configuration
will fail.
What would happen before this patch is that configurations using such
TC_ACT_XXXX value would be successful. This is why I proposed to keep
the fixup.
I initially thought the kernel behavior in the above scenario would
match exactly TC_ACT_UNSPEC processing, but as you noted with the
example in your previous email, TC_ACT_UNSPEC processing is actually a
bit different.
Cheers,
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-31 16:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-30 12:30 [PATCH net-next v5 0/4] TC: refactor act_mirred packets re-injection Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 12:30 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/4] net/sched: user-space can't set unknown tcfa_action values Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 12:36 ` Jiri Pirko
2018-07-30 14:03 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-07-30 14:21 ` Jiri Pirko
2018-07-30 16:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 19:31 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-07-31 9:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-07-31 13:53 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-07-31 14:40 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2018-08-01 14:34 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-07-30 12:30 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/4] tc/act: remove unneeded RCU lock in action callback Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 12:30 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/4] net/tc: introduce TC_ACT_REINSERT Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 12:40 ` Jiri Pirko
2018-07-30 16:31 ` David Miller
2018-07-30 16:49 ` Jiri Pirko
2018-07-30 16:56 ` David Miller
2018-07-30 12:30 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/4] act_mirred: use TC_ACT_REINSERT when possible Paolo Abeni
2018-07-30 12:42 ` Jiri Pirko
2018-07-30 16:31 ` [PATCH net-next v5 0/4] TC: refactor act_mirred packets re-injection 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=e2a29da9514e38ab2caef2f2a592780e60ceda4c.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eyal.birger@gmail.com \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--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).