Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[Xin Long]

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:01 PM, David Ahern  wrote:
> On 7/31/17 7:40 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>> To respect the old code more, setting RTPROT_RA only when
>> it's with the flag (ADDRCONF | DEFAULT | ROUTEINFO),
>> shouldn't it be:
>
> Look at rtm_fill_info:
>
> if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
>
>
> If either flag is set the protocol should be RTPROT_RA and looking at
> both places that seems correct to me.
>
ok, right

Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[David Ahern]

On 7/31/17 7:40 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> To respect the old code more, setting RTPROT_RA only when
> it's with the flag (ADDRCONF | DEFAULT | ROUTEINFO),
> shouldn't it be:

Look at rtm_fill_info:

if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;


If either flag is set the protocol should be RTPROT_RA and looking at
both places that seems correct to me.

Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[Xin Long]

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:12 PM, David Ahern  wrote:
> On 7/30/17 9:31 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>>> Did you look at removing this hunk from rt6_fill_node:
>>>
>>> if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
>>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
>>> else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
>>> if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
>>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
>>> else
>>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
>>> }
>> The issue seems to affect "ip -6 route flush all" as well, not only cache
>> since 'else if {}' also  causes rtm proto being different from rt6 proto.
>>
>>>
>>> And have rtm_protocol set properly on the route when it is installed?
>> The codes not keeping rtm proto consistent with rt6 proto day 1,
>> any idea on why it didn't use rt6 proto in kernel properly?
>
> no, AFAIK it was just an oversight when the original code was written. I
> do not know of any reason that would prevent properly setting the
> rt6i_protocol in the route when it is allocated.
That's what I was worried about, it might break something,
but double checked, should be fine.

>
> Something like this (not compiled, much less tested):
To respect the old code more, setting RTPROT_RA only when
it's with the flag (ADDRCONF | DEFAULT | ROUTEINFO),
shouldn't it be:

[...]
@@ -2464,6 +2465,7 @@ static struct rt6_info
*rt6_add_route_info(struct net *net,
.fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
.fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = net,
+   .fc_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL,
};

cfg.fc_table = l3mdev_fib_table(dev) ? : RT6_TABLE_INFO,
@@ -2471,8 +2473,10 @@ static struct rt6_info
*rt6_add_route_info(struct net *net,
cfg.fc_gateway = *gwaddr;

/* We should treat it as a default route if prefix length is 0. */
-   if (!prefixlen)
+   if (!prefixlen) {
+   cfg.fc_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
cfg.fc_flags |= RTF_DEFAULT;
+   }

ip6_route_add(, NULL);

@@ -2516,6 +2520,7 @@ struct rt6_info *rt6_add_dflt_router(const
struct in6_addr *gwaddr,
.fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
.fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = dev_net(dev),
+   .fc_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL,
};
[...]

or you changed it intentionally ?

I will do some testing before posting v2.
thanks for your suggestion. :-)

>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> index 4d30c96a819d..9a928839d247 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> @@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ static void rt6_do_redirect(struct dst_entry *dst,
> struct sock *sk, struct sk_bu
> if (!nrt)
> goto out;
>
> +   nrt->rt6i_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
> nrt->rt6i_flags = RTF_GATEWAY|RTF_UP|RTF_DYNAMIC|RTF_CACHE;
> if (on_link)
> nrt->rt6i_flags &= ~RTF_GATEWAY;
> @@ -2461,6 +2462,7 @@ static struct rt6_info *rt6_add_route_info(struct
> net *net,
> .fc_dst_len = prefixlen,
> .fc_flags   = RTF_GATEWAY | RTF_ADDRCONF |
> RTF_ROUTEINFO |
>   RTF_UP | RTF_PREF(pref),
> +   .fc_protocol= RTPROT_RA,
> .fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
> .fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
> .fc_nlinfo.nl_net = net,
> @@ -2513,6 +2515,7 @@ struct rt6_info *rt6_add_dflt_router(const struct
> in6_addr *gwaddr,
> .fc_ifindex = dev->ifindex,
> .fc_flags   = RTF_GATEWAY | RTF_ADDRCONF | RTF_DEFAULT |
>   RTF_UP | RTF_EXPIRES | RTF_PREF(pref),
> +   .fc_protocol= RTPROT_RA,
> .fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
> .fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
> .fc_nlinfo.nl_net = dev_net(dev),
> @@ -3424,14 +3427,6 @@ static int rt6_fill_node(struct net *net,
> rtm->rtm_flags = 0;
> rtm->rtm_scope = RT_SCOPE_UNIVERSE;
> rtm->rtm_protocol = rt->rt6i_protocol;
> -   if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
> -   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
> -   else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
> -   if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
> -   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
> -   else
> -   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
> -   }
>
> if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_CACHE)
> rtm->rtm_flags |= RTM_F_CLONED;

Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[David Ahern]

On 7/30/17 9:31 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>> Did you look at removing this hunk from rt6_fill_node:
>>
>> if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
>> else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
>> if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
>> else
>> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
>> }
> The issue seems to affect "ip -6 route flush all" as well, not only cache
> since 'else if {}' also  causes rtm proto being different from rt6 proto.
> 
>>
>> And have rtm_protocol set properly on the route when it is installed?
> The codes not keeping rtm proto consistent with rt6 proto day 1,
> any idea on why it didn't use rt6 proto in kernel properly?

no, AFAIK it was just an oversight when the original code was written. I
do not know of any reason that would prevent properly setting the
rt6i_protocol in the route when it is allocated.

Something like this (not compiled, much less tested):

diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
index 4d30c96a819d..9a928839d247 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -2347,6 +2347,7 @@ static void rt6_do_redirect(struct dst_entry *dst,
struct sock *sk, struct sk_bu
if (!nrt)
goto out;

+   nrt->rt6i_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
nrt->rt6i_flags = RTF_GATEWAY|RTF_UP|RTF_DYNAMIC|RTF_CACHE;
if (on_link)
nrt->rt6i_flags &= ~RTF_GATEWAY;
@@ -2461,6 +2462,7 @@ static struct rt6_info *rt6_add_route_info(struct
net *net,
.fc_dst_len = prefixlen,
.fc_flags   = RTF_GATEWAY | RTF_ADDRCONF |
RTF_ROUTEINFO |
  RTF_UP | RTF_PREF(pref),
+   .fc_protocol= RTPROT_RA,
.fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
.fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = net,
@@ -2513,6 +2515,7 @@ struct rt6_info *rt6_add_dflt_router(const struct
in6_addr *gwaddr,
.fc_ifindex = dev->ifindex,
.fc_flags   = RTF_GATEWAY | RTF_ADDRCONF | RTF_DEFAULT |
  RTF_UP | RTF_EXPIRES | RTF_PREF(pref),
+   .fc_protocol= RTPROT_RA,
.fc_nlinfo.portid = 0,
.fc_nlinfo.nlh = NULL,
.fc_nlinfo.nl_net = dev_net(dev),
@@ -3424,14 +3427,6 @@ static int rt6_fill_node(struct net *net,
rtm->rtm_flags = 0;
rtm->rtm_scope = RT_SCOPE_UNIVERSE;
rtm->rtm_protocol = rt->rt6i_protocol;
-   if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
-   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
-   else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
-   if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
-   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
-   else
-   rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
-   }

if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_CACHE)
rtm->rtm_flags |= RTM_F_CLONED;

Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[Xin Long]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 2:35 PM, David Ahern  wrote:
> On 7/30/17 6:51 AM, Xin Long wrote:
>> diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
>> index 4d30c96..187580f 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
>> @@ -2912,9 +2912,11 @@ static int rtm_to_fib6_config(struct sk_buff *skb, 
>> struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
>>   cfg->fc_dst_len = rtm->rtm_dst_len;
>>   cfg->fc_src_len = rtm->rtm_src_len;
>>   cfg->fc_flags = RTF_UP;
>> - cfg->fc_protocol = rtm->rtm_protocol;
>>   cfg->fc_type = rtm->rtm_type;
>>
>> + if (rtm->rtm_protocol != RTPROT_REDIRECT)
>> + cfg->fc_protocol = rtm->rtm_protocol;
>> +
>>   if (rtm->rtm_type == RTN_UNREACHABLE ||
>>   rtm->rtm_type == RTN_BLACKHOLE ||
>>   rtm->rtm_type == RTN_PROHIBIT ||
Hi, David
>
> Did you look at removing this hunk from rt6_fill_node:
>
> if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
> else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
> if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
> else
> rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
> }
The issue seems to affect "ip -6 route flush all" as well, not only cache
since 'else if {}' also  causes rtm proto being different from rt6 proto.

>
> And have rtm_protocol set properly on the route when it is installed?
The codes not keeping rtm proto consistent with rt6 proto day 1,
any idea on why it didn't use rt6 proto in kernel properly?

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: set fc_protocol with 0 when rtm_protocol is RTPROT_REDIRECT

[David Ahern]

On 7/30/17 6:51 AM, Xin Long wrote:
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> index 4d30c96..187580f 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> @@ -2912,9 +2912,11 @@ static int rtm_to_fib6_config(struct sk_buff *skb, 
> struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
>   cfg->fc_dst_len = rtm->rtm_dst_len;
>   cfg->fc_src_len = rtm->rtm_src_len;
>   cfg->fc_flags = RTF_UP;
> - cfg->fc_protocol = rtm->rtm_protocol;
>   cfg->fc_type = rtm->rtm_type;
>  
> + if (rtm->rtm_protocol != RTPROT_REDIRECT)
> + cfg->fc_protocol = rtm->rtm_protocol;
> +
>   if (rtm->rtm_type == RTN_UNREACHABLE ||
>   rtm->rtm_type == RTN_BLACKHOLE ||
>   rtm->rtm_type == RTN_PROHIBIT ||

Did you look at removing this hunk from rt6_fill_node:

if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC)
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_REDIRECT;
else if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_ADDRCONF) {
if (rt->rt6i_flags & (RTF_DEFAULT | RTF_ROUTEINFO))
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_RA;
else
rtm->rtm_protocol = RTPROT_KERNEL;
}

And have rtm_protocol set properly on the route when it is installed?