Displaying 17 results from an estimated 17 matches for "br_fdb_added_by_user".
2023 Jun 19
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next v2 1/3] bridge: Set BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER early in fdb_add_entry
...- a/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_fdb.c
@@ -1056,7 +1056,7 @@ static int fdb_add_entry(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *source,
if (!(flags & NLM_F_CREATE))
return -ENOENT;
- fdb = fdb_create(br, source, addr, vid, 0);
+ fdb = fdb_create(br, source, addr, vid, BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER);
if (!fdb)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -1069,6 +1069,8 @@ static int fdb_add_entry(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *source,
WRITE_ONCE(fdb->dst, source);
modified = true;
}
+
+ set_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
}
if (fdb_to_nud(br, fdb) != state)...
2023 Jun 20
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] bridge: Add a limit on learned FDB entries
...ld help me test the intersection
of multiple bits on both sides. Do you have any in mind?
> > +
> > return fdb;
> > }
> > @@ -894,7 +940,7 @@ void br_fdb_update(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *source,
> > }
> > if (unlikely(test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &flags)))
> > - set_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
> > + fdb_set_flag_not_learned(br, fdb, BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER);
>
> Unacceptable to take hash_lock and block all learning here, eventual
> consistency is ok or some other method that is much lighter a...
2023 Jun 22
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] bridge: Add a limit on learned FDB entries
...tion
> of multiple bits on both sides. Do you have any in mind?
>
>>> +
>>> return fdb;
>>> }
>>> @@ -894,7 +940,7 @@ void br_fdb_update(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *source,
>>> }
>>> if (unlikely(test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &flags)))
>>> - set_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
>>> + fdb_set_flag_not_learned(br, fdb, BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER);
>>
>> Unacceptable to take hash_lock and block all learning here, eventual
>> consistency is ok or some other method that...
2023 Apr 12
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 07:24:07PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> I'll send v2 with BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN not prevented from being
> notified from switchdev.
>
> Unless you have any objection, I won't send v2 like this:
>
> if (test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags) &&
> !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags) &&
> !test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags))
> return;
>
> but like this:
>
> /* Entries with just the BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER flag set were created
> * usi...
2023 Apr 12
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
..."hey, did you know you were never using the
bridge fdb flags correctly?" is starting to become a bit of a meme.
I'll send v2 with BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN not prevented from being
notified from switchdev.
Unless you have any objection, I won't send v2 like this:
if (test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags) &&
!test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags) &&
!test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN, &fdb->flags))
return;
but like this:
/* Entries with just the BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER flag set were created
* using 'bridge fdb add ... master dynami...
2023 Jun 19
2
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] bridge: Add a limit on learned FDB entries
...an entry does not come from learning
(BR_FDB_NOT_LEARNED_MASK) are now only set or cleared under br->hash_lock
as well, and when the boolean value of (fdb->flags &
BR_FDB_NOT_LEARNED_MASK) changes the accounting is updated.
This introduces one additional locked update in br_fdb_update if
BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER was set. This is only the case when creating a new
entry via netlink, and never in the packet handling fast path.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Nixdorf <jnixdorf-oss at avm.de>
---
Changes since v1:
- Do not initialize fdb_*_entries to 0. (from review)
- Do not skip decrementing on 0. (from re...
2023 Jun 19
4
[Bridge] [PATCH net-next v2 0/3, iproute2-next 0/1] bridge: Add a limit on learned FDB entries
...efault is disabling the
limit (0).
Without any limit a malicious actor may OOM a kernel by spamming packets
with changing MAC addresses on their bridge port, so allow the bridge
creator to limit the number of entries.
Currently the manual entries are identified by the bridge flags
BR_FDB_LOCAL or BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, and changes to those flags are
protected under a lock. This means the limit also applies to entries
created with BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_EXT_LEARN but none of the other two,
e.g. ones added by SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_BRIDGE.
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230515085046.4457-1-jnixdorf-oss at avm.de/
C...
2023 Apr 10
2
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
There is a structural problem in switchdev, where the flag bits in
struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info (added_by_user, is_local etc) only
represent a simplified / denatured view of what's in struct
net_bridge_fdb_entry :: flags (BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, BR_FDB_LOCAL etc).
Each time we want to pass more information about struct
net_bridge_fdb_entry :: flags to struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info
(here, BR_FDB_STATIC), we find that FDB entries were already notified to
switchdev with no regard to this flag, and thus, switchdev drivers had
no indicati...
2023 Apr 12
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 05:27:33PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> How are extern_learn FDB entries processed by spectrum's
> SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE handler?
No different than "BR_FDB_STATIC", which is a bug I'm aware of and
intend to fix in net-next when I get the time (together with all the
other combinations enabled by the bridge). Entry has ageing disabled,
but
2023 Apr 12
1
[Bridge] [PATCH net] net: bridge: switchdev: don't notify FDB entries with "master dynamic"
...023 at 11:49:51PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> There is a structural problem in switchdev, where the flag bits in
> struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info (added_by_user, is_local etc) only
> represent a simplified / denatured view of what's in struct
> net_bridge_fdb_entry :: flags (BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, BR_FDB_LOCAL etc).
> Each time we want to pass more information about struct
> net_bridge_fdb_entry :: flags to struct switchdev_notifier_fdb_info
> (here, BR_FDB_STATIC), we find that FDB entries were already notified to
> switchdev with no regard to this flag, and thus, switchdev dri...
2023 Mar 18
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 1/6] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...ed:1;
};
diff --git a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
index de18e9c1d7a7..9707d3fdb396 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ static void br_switchdev_fdb_populate(struct net_bridge *br,
item->added_by_user = test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags);
item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags);
+ item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags);
item->locked = false;
item->info.dev = (!p || item->is_local)...
2023 Apr 06
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 18:07, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote:
> As a bug fix, stop reporting to switchdev those FDB entries with
> BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER && !BR_FDB_STATIC. Then, after "net" is merged into
> "net-next" next Thursday (the ship has sailed for today), add "bool static"
It is probably too late today (now I have a Debian based VM that can do
the selftests), but with this bug fix I have 1) not sub...
2023 Apr 06
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 05:17:46PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 18:07, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote:
> > As a bug fix, stop reporting to switchdev those FDB entries with
> > BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER && !BR_FDB_STATIC. Then, after "net" is merged into
> > "net-next" next Thursday (the ship has sailed for today), add "bool static"
>
> It is probably too late today (now I have a Debian based VM that can do
> the selftests), but with this bug f...
2023 Mar 30
2
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
...gt; If you have a suggestion, feel free.
Didn't I explain what I would do from the first reply on this thread?
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20230318141010.513424-3-netdev at kapio-technology.com/#25270613
As a bug fix, stop reporting to switchdev those FDB entries with
BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER && !BR_FDB_STATIC. Then, after "net" is merged into
"net-next" next Thursday (the ship has sailed for today), add "bool static"
to the switchdev notifier info, and make all switchdev drivers (everywhere
where a SWITCHDEV_FDB_ADD_TO_DEVICE handler appears) ignor...
2023 Jan 17
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...net/bridge/br_switchdev.c b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
> index 7eb6fd5bb917..60c05a00a1df 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
> @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ static void br_switchdev_fdb_populate(struct net_bridge *br,
> item->added_by_user = test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
> item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags);
> item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags);
> + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags);
Why reverse logic? Why not just name this "is_static&...
2023 Jan 18
1
[Bridge] [RFC PATCH net-next 1/5] net: bridge: add dynamic flag to switchdev notifier
...t/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> index 7eb6fd5bb917..60c05a00a1df 100644
>> --- a/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_switchdev.c
>> @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ static void br_switchdev_fdb_populate(struct
>> net_bridge *br,
>> item->added_by_user = test_bit(BR_FDB_ADDED_BY_USER, &fdb->flags);
>> item->offloaded = test_bit(BR_FDB_OFFLOADED, &fdb->flags);
>> item->is_local = test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &fdb->flags);
>> + item->is_dyn = !test_bit(BR_FDB_STATIC, &fdb->flags);
>
> Why reverse logic? Why not just name...
2023 Mar 30
1
[Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: dsa: propagate flags down towards drivers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 16:09, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 02:59:04PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 15:43, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 09:45:26PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote:
>> >> So the solution would be to not let the DSA layer send the