On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 00:43:01 +0100 Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> no objections from my side to this patch, thanks.
Applied, thanks!
Hi Martin,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 04:02:13PM +0100, Martin Willi wrote:
> Hi Pablo,
>
> > > +static int vrf_output6_direct_finish(struct net *net, struct sock *sk,
> > > + struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > +{
> > > + vrf_finish_direct(skb);
> > > +
> > > + return vrf_ip6_l
Hi Pablo,
> > +static int vrf_output6_direct_finish(struct net *net, struct sock *sk,
> > +struct sk_buff *skb)
> > +{
> > + vrf_finish_direct(skb);
> > +
> > + return vrf_ip6_local_out(net, sk, skb);
> > +}
> > +
> > static int vrf_output6_direct(struct net *
Hi Martin,
Just a few nitpicks, see below.
On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 08:30:30AM +0100, Martin Willi wrote:
> VRF devices use an optimized direct path on output if a default qdisc
> is involved, calling Netfilter hooks directly. This path, however, does
> not consider Netfilter rules completing asyn
On 11/9/20 4:44 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:30:30 +0100 Martin Willi wrote:
>> VRF devices use an optimized direct path on output if a default qdisc
>> is involved, calling Netfilter hooks directly. This path, however, does
>> not consider Netfilter rules completing asynchron
On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 08:30:30 +0100 Martin Willi wrote:
> VRF devices use an optimized direct path on output if a default qdisc
> is involved, calling Netfilter hooks directly. This path, however, does
> not consider Netfilter rules completing asynchronously, such as with
> NFQUEUE. The Netfilter ok
