On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 09:26:59AM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:34 AM, John W. Linville
> <linvi...@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/geneve.c b/drivers/net/geneve.c
> > index 8f5c02eed47d..291d3d7754a8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/geneve.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/geneve.c
> > +#define GENEVE_F_IPV6 0x00000001
>
> I wasn't sure why we needed this flag. Can't we just look at the
> remote address family?
Yeah, I had grander plans... :-) I think it can be removed.
> > -static void geneve_sock_release(struct geneve_sock *gs)
> > +static void __geneve_sock_release(struct geneve_sock *gs)
> > {
> > if (--gs->refcnt)
> > return;
>
> Do we need a check for NULL first here?
Sure.
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
> > +static int geneve6_build_skb(struct dst_entry *dst, struct sk_buff *skb,
> > + __be16 tun_flags, u8 vni[3], u8 opt_len, u8
> > *opt,
> > + bool csum, bool xnet)
> > +{
> > + struct genevehdr *gnvh;
> > + int min_headroom;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + skb_scrub_packet(skb, xnet);
>
> Is there a reason why this applies to only IPv6? It seems like it
> would be common
The dst vs rt thing was the motivator. It probably could be refactored
to share some code between geneve_build_skb and geneve6_build_skb.
> > +static struct dst_entry *geneve_get_dst(struct sk_buff *skb,
>
> It might be worth clarifying this name - it wasn't immediately obvious
> to me the difference between geneve_get_rt() and geneve_get_dst() is
> IPv4 vs. IPv6.
geneve_get_v4_rt and geneve_get_v6_dst?
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
> > +static netdev_tx_t geneve6_xmit_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device
> > *dev,
> > + struct ip_tunnel_info *info)
> [...]
> > + dst = geneve_get_dst(skb, dev, &fl6, info);
> > + if (IS_ERR(dst)) {
> > + netdev_dbg(dev, "no route to %pI6\n", &fl6.daddr);
> > + dev->stats.tx_carrier_errors++;
> > + goto tx_error;
> > + }
>
> It looks like we double log/count this error (although this also
> appears to be a problem for IPv4).
Indeed. I'll try to fix/refactor that a bit...
> > + err = udp_tunnel6_xmit_skb(dst, gs6->sock->sk, skb, dev,
> > + &fl6.saddr, &fl6.daddr, 0, ttl,
> > + sport, geneve->dst_port, !udp_csum);
>
> It seems like TOS is not handled here?
There is no tos parameter for udp_tunnel6_xmit_skb. Is there some
other way to inject it? Is there a mapping to priority (i.e. the
0 parameter)?
> > @@ -823,9 +1095,11 @@ static int geneve_configure(struct net *net, struct
> > net_device *dev,
> > int err;
> >
> > if (metadata) {
> > - if (rem_addr || vni || tos || ttl)
> > + if (remote != &geneve_remote_unspec || vni || tos || ttl)
> > return -EINVAL;
>
> I think this will fail in the non-compat metadata case. The remote
> that is passed in will be a zeroed copy on the stack, so the address
> won't match the static version. I believe the check should be for
> AF_UNSPEC instead.
It is actually checking the pointer value against the address of
that static data structure, which is only reference through the
geneve_dev_create_fb path to calling geneve_configure. Knowing that
are you still troubled by it?
John
P.S. I may not respond/repost for a while due to some travel during
the next week...
--
John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you
linvi...@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
