On 2/17/23 8:00 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index 1503f61336b6..6c1956e36c97 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
[...]
@@ -5838,21 +5836,28 @@ static int bpf_ipv4_fib_lookup(struct net *net, struct
bpf_fib_lookup *params,
if (likely(nhc->nhc_gw_family != AF_INET6)) {
if (nhc->nhc_gw_family)
params->ipv4_dst = nhc->nhc_gw.ipv4;
-
- neigh = __ipv4_neigh_lookup_noref(dev,
- (__force u32)params->ipv4_dst);
} else {
struct in6_addr *dst = (struct in6_addr *)params->ipv6_dst;
params->family = AF_INET6;
*dst = nhc->nhc_gw.ipv6;
- neigh = __ipv6_neigh_lookup_noref_stub(dev, dst);
}
+ if (flags & BPF_FIB_LOOKUP_SKIP_NEIGH)
+ goto set_fwd_params;
+
+ if (params->family == AF_INET6)
Nit, would have probably more intuitive to keep the same test also here
(nhc->nhc_gw_family != AF_INET6), but either way, lgtm.
Ack.
Are you still required to fill the params->smac in bpf_fib_set_fwd_params()
in that case, meaning, shouldn't bpf_redirect_neigh() take care of it as well
from neigh_output()? Looks unnecessary and could be moved out too.
Good point. will move it out from bpf_fib_set_fwd_params also. Thanks for the
review.
