On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 8:26 AM Mathieu Xhonneux wrote:
>
> The BPF seg6local hook should be powerful enough to enable users to
> implement most of the use-cases one could think of. After some thinking,
> we figured out that the following actions should be possible on a SRv6
> packet, requiring 3
2018-05-14 23:40 GMT+01:00 Daniel Borkmann :
> On 05/12/2018 07:25 PM, Mathieu Xhonneux wrote:
> [...]
>> +BPF_CALL_4(bpf_lwt_seg6_store_bytes, struct sk_buff *, skb, u32, offset,
>> +const void *, from, u32, len)
>> +{
>> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6_BPF)
>> + struct seg6_bpf_srh_
On 05/12/2018 07:25 PM, Mathieu Xhonneux wrote:
[...]
> +BPF_CALL_4(bpf_lwt_seg6_store_bytes, struct sk_buff *, skb, u32, offset,
> +const void *, from, u32, len)
> +{
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6_SEG6_BPF)
> + struct seg6_bpf_srh_state *srh_state =
> + this_cpu_ptr(&seg6_b
The BPF seg6local hook should be powerful enough to enable users to
implement most of the use-cases one could think of. After some thinking,
we figured out that the following actions should be possible on a SRv6
packet, requiring 3 specific helpers :
- bpf_lwt_seg6_store_bytes: Modify non-sensi
