On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 10:26 AM Hideaki Yoshifuji
<hideaki.yoshif...@miraclelinux.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> 2020年8月9日(日) 19:52 Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 5:26 PM Hideaki Yoshifuji
> > <hideaki.yoshif...@miraclelinux.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > 2020年8月6日(木) 23:03 David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > On 8/6/20 2:55 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:50 AM Hideaki Yoshifuji
> > > > > <hideaki.yoshif...@miraclelinux.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 2020年8月4日(火) 0:35 Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> This is to add an ip_dev_find like function for ipv6, used to find
> > > > >>> the dev by saddr.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> It will be used by TIPC protocol. So also export it.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> ---
> > > > >>> include/net/addrconf.h | 2 ++
> > > > >>> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >>> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> diff --git a/include/net/addrconf.h b/include/net/addrconf.h
> > > > >>> index 8418b7d..ba3f6c15 100644
> > > > >>> --- a/include/net/addrconf.h
> > > > >>> +++ b/include/net/addrconf.h
> > > > >>> @@ -97,6 +97,8 @@ bool ipv6_chk_custom_prefix(const struct in6_addr
> > > > >>> *addr,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> int ipv6_chk_prefix(const struct in6_addr *addr, struct net_device
> > > > >>> *dev);
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> +struct net_device *ipv6_dev_find(struct net *net, const struct
> > > > >>> in6_addr *addr);
> > > > >>> +
> > > > >>
> > > > >> How do we handle link-local addresses?
> > > > > This is what "if (!result)" branch meant to do:
> > > > >
> > > > > + if (!result) {
> > > > > + struct rt6_info *rt;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + rt = rt6_lookup(net, addr, NULL, 0, NULL, 0);
> > > > > + if (rt) {
> > > > > + dev = rt->dst.dev;
> > > > > + ip6_rt_put(rt);
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + } else {
> > > > > + dev = result->idev->dev;
> > > > > + }
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > the stated purpose of this function is to find the netdevice to which an
> > > > address is attached. A route lookup should not be needed. Walking the
> > > > address hash list finds the address and hence the netdev or it does not.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > User supplied scope id which should be set for link-local addresses
> > > in TIPC_NLA_UDP_LOCAL attribute must be honored when we
> > > check the address.
> > Hi, Hideaki san,
> >
> > Sorry for not understanding your comment earlier.
> >
> > The bad thing is tipc in iproute2 doesn't seem able to set scope_id.
>
> I looked into the iproute2 code quickly and I think it should; it uses
> getaddrinfo(3) and it will fill if you say "fe80::1%eth0" or something
> like that.... OR, fix the bug.
right, thanks.
>
> > I saw many places in kernel doing this check:
> >
> > if (__ipv6_addr_needs_scope_id(atype) &&
> > !ip6->sin6_scope_id) { return -EINVAL; }
> >
> > Can I ask why scope id is needed for link-local addresses?
> > and is that for link-local addresses only?
>
> Because we distinguish link-local scope addresses on different interfaces.
> On the other hand, we do not distinguish global scope addresses on
> different interfaces.
okay.
>
> >
> > >
> > > ipv6_chk_addr() can check if the address and supplied ifindex is a valid
> > > local address. Or introduce an extra ifindex argument to ipv6_dev_find().
> > Yeah, but if scope id means ifindex for link-local addresses,
> > ipv6_dev_find()
> > would be more like a function to validate the address with right scope id.
> >
>
> I think we should find a net_device with a specific "valid" (non-tentative)
> address here, and your initial implementation is not enough because it does
> not reject tentative addresses. I'd recommend using generic ipv6_chk_addr()
> inside.
ipv6_chk_addr() is calling ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(), which traverses
the addr hash list again. So I'm thinking to reuse the code of
ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(), and do:
+static struct net_device *
+__ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(struct net *net, const struct in6_addr *addr,
+ const struct net_device *dev, bool skip_dev_check,
+ int strict, u32 banned_flags)
{
unsigned int hash = inet6_addr_hash(net, addr);
const struct net_device *l3mdev;
@@ -1926,12 +1918,29 @@ int ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(struct net *net,
const struct in6_addr *addr,
(!dev || ifp->idev->dev == dev ||
!(ifp->scope&(IFA_LINK|IFA_HOST) || strict))) {
rcu_read_unlock();
- return 1;
+ return ifp->idev->dev;
}
}
rcu_read_unlock();
- return 0;
+ return NULL;
+}
and change these functions to :
int ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(struct net *net, const struct in6_addr *addr,
const struct net_device *dev, bool skip_dev_check,
int strict, u32 banned_flags)
{
return __ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(net, addr, dev, skip_dev_check,
strict, banned_flags) ? 1 : 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags);
struct net_device *ipv6_dev_find(struct net *net, const struct in6_addr *addr,
struct net_device *dev)
{
return __ipv6_chk_addr_and_flags(net, addr, NULL, 0, 1,
IFA_F_TENTATIVE);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(ipv6_dev_find);
what do you think?
