* Re: vrf and flowtable problems
2019-07-25 10:10 vrf and flowtable problems Pablo Neira Ayuso
2019-07-25 10:48 ` wenxu
@ 2019-07-26 10:23 ` wenxu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: wenxu @ 2019-07-26 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: netfilter-devel
Hi Pabo,
I think it's the problem of their iptables offload patch.
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=blob;f=target/linux/generic/hack-4.19/650-netfilter-add-xt_OFFLOAD-target.patch
@304, It gets the this_dst and other_dst according to src ip of tuple. It is not correct. That's why they swap iifdx and oifdx can work around
It should like nftables do. this_dst=skb_dst and other_dst get route through src ip of tuple in origin dir.
294 +static struct dst_entry *
295 +xt_flowoffload_dst(const struct nf_conn *ct, enum ip_conntrack_dir dir,
296 + const struct xt_action_param *par)
297 +{
298 + struct dst_entry *dst = NULL;
299 + struct flowi fl;
300 +
301 + memset(&fl, 0, sizeof(fl));
302 + switch (xt_family(par)) {
303 + case NFPROTO_IPV4:
304 + fl.u.ip4.daddr = ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.src.u3.ip;
305 + break;
306 + case NFPROTO_IPV6:
307 + fl.u.ip6.saddr = ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.dst.u3.in6;
308 + fl.u.ip6.daddr = ct->tuplehash[dir].tuple.src.u3.in6;
309 + break;
310 + }
311 +
312 + nf_route(xt_net(par), &dst, &fl, false, xt_family(par));
313 +
314 + return dst;
315 +}
316 +
317 +static int
318 +xt_flowoffload_route(struct sk_buff *skb, const struct nf_conn *ct,
319 + const struct xt_action_param *par,
320 + struct nf_flow_route *route, enum ip_conntrack_dir dir)
321 +{
322 + struct dst_entry *this_dst, *other_dst;
323 +
324 + this_dst = xt_flowoffload_dst(ct, dir, par);
325 + other_dst = xt_flowoffload_dst(ct, !dir, par);
326 + if (!this_dst || !other_dst)
327 + return -ENOENT;
328 +
329 + if (dst_xfrm(this_dst) || dst_xfrm(other_dst))
330 + return -EINVAL;
331 +
332 + route->tuple[dir].dst = this_dst;
333 + route->tuple[!dir].dst = other_dst;
On 7/25/2019 6:10 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There are reports
>
> https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/2266#issuecomment-514681715
>
> This report might not be your fault, but you can probably help fixing
> bugs before we move on anywhere else.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread