On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:18 PM, David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/5/18 1:57 AM, Xin Long wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 2:36 AM, David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 7/4/18 11:56 AM, Xin Long wrote:
>>>
>>>>> your commands are not a proper test. The test should succeed and fail
>>>>> based on the routing lookup, not iptables rules.
>>>> A proper test can be done easily with netns, as vrf can't isolate much.
>>>> I don't want to bother forwarding/ directory with netns, so I will probably
>>>> just drop this selftest, and let the feature patch go first.
>>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, VRF isolates at the routing layer and this is a routing change. We
>>> need to understand why it does not work with VRF. Perhaps another tweak
>>> is needed for VRF.
>> One problem was that the peer may not use the address on the dev
>> that echo_request comes from as the src IP of echo_reply when the
>> echo_request's dst IP is broadcast, but try to get another one by
>> looking up a route without ".flowi4_oif" set. See:
>>
>> icmp_reply()->fib_compute_spec_dst():
>> struct flowi4 fl4 = {
>> .flowi4_iif = LOOPBACK_IFINDEX,
>> .daddr = ip_hdr(skb)->saddr,
>> .flowi4_tos = RT_TOS(ip_hdr(skb)->tos),
>> .flowi4_scope = scope,
>> .flowi4_mark = IN_DEV_SRC_VMARK(in_dev) ? skb->mark
>> : 0,
>> };
>> if (!fib_lookup(net, &fl4, &res, 0))
>> return FIB_RES_PREFSRC(net, res);
>>
>>
>> Without ".flowi4_oif" set, it won't match the vrf route. That's why
>> I had to make h2 NOT into a vrf so that h1 can get the echo_reply.
>> But it can't tell if this echo_reply is from h2 or r1, as r1's echo_reply
>> will also use the same src IP which is actually got from main route
>> space as ".flowi4_oif" is not set.
>> (hope I this description is clear to you) :)
>>
>> So i'm not sure if we can do any tweak for VRF.
>>
>
> Try this:
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/fib_frontend.c b/net/ipv4/fib_frontend.c
> index b21833651394..e46cdd310e5f 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/fib_frontend.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/fib_frontend.c
> @@ -300,6 +300,7 @@ __be32 fib_compute_spec_dst(struct sk_buff *skb)
> if (!ipv4_is_zeronet(ip_hdr(skb)->saddr)) {
> struct flowi4 fl4 = {
> .flowi4_iif = LOOPBACK_IFINDEX,
> + .flowi4_oif = l3mdev_master_ifindex_rcu(dev),
> .daddr = ip_hdr(skb)->saddr,
> .flowi4_tos = RT_TOS(ip_hdr(skb)->tos),
> .flowi4_scope = scope,
Great, with your fix, I can extend more for this selftest.
but I hope no side effects would be caused.
Thank you.
