From: David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks•com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft•net>
Cc: tgraf@suug•ch, netdev@vger•kernel.org, shm@cumulusnetworks•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] inetpeer: Add support for VRFs
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:41:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55DCEF20.5080908@cumulusnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150825.134759.1592811364914291771.davem@davemloft.net>
On 8/25/15 1:47 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Ahern <dsa@cumulusnetworks•com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 20:01:34 -0600
>
>> On 8/23/15 6:15 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
>>> On 08/23/15 at 08:26am, David Ahern wrote:
>>>> inetpeer caches based on address only, so duplicate IP addresses
>>>> within
>>>> a namespace return the same cached entry. Similar to IP fragments
>>>> handle
>>>> duplicate addresses across VRFs by adding the VRF master device index
>>>> to
>>>> the lookup.
>>>
>>> We have a lot of other places which use the address only. Are you
>>> going to add the VRF id to all these places as well?
>>>
>>
>> If appropriate, yes. I have fixed IP fragments and this patch fixes
>> inetpeer cache. In both cases (L3 artifacts) the vrf device index
>> provides the means to uniquely identify duplicate IP addresses within
>> a namespace. If you know of other code that might be impacted I will
>> investigate and fix as needed.
>
> Anyways, what this inetpeer patch is doing is the wrong abstraction.
>
> The key is really "daddr + netdev" so make a helper that works using
> those arguments.
That's what I have here:
struct inetpeer_addr {
struct inetpeer_addr_base addr;
__u16 family;
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NET_VRF)
int vif;
#endif
};
the addr_compare then checks the vif (VRF device index) after the N-word
address compare.
>
> Then it is clear as we propagate this around that addresses need to
> be coupled with the device in question in order to be keyed properly.
>
Meaning rename struct inetpeer_addr to struct inetpeer_key and
addr_compare to entry_compare or key_compare? Everything else still
treats the address + VRF device as the key.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-25 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-23 14:26 [PATCH net-next] inetpeer: Add support for VRFs David Ahern
2015-08-24 0:15 ` Thomas Graf
2015-08-24 2:01 ` David Ahern
2015-08-25 17:37 ` Thomas Graf
2015-08-25 20:47 ` David Miller
2015-08-25 22:41 ` David Ahern [this message]
2015-08-25 22:52 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55DCEF20.5080908@cumulusnetworks.com \
--to=dsa@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=shm@cumulusnetworks$(echo .)com \
--cc=tgraf@suug$(echo .)ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox