On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 07:23:55PM +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:07:40AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday 2009-04-28 10:15, Simon Horman wrote:
> > >
> > >It seems to me that it should be easy enough to fix by changing
> > >fwmark in ip_vs_sched_persist() from:
> > >
> > >union nf_inet_addr fwmark = {
> > > .all = { 0, 0, 0, htonl(svc->fwmark) }
> > >};
> > >
> > >to:
> > >
> > >union nf_inet_addr fwmark = {
> > > .all = { htonl(svc->fwmark), 0, 0, 0 }
> > >};
> > >
> > >Assuming that this would result in fwmark->ip being set to
> > >htonl(svc->fwmark), which is relevant if svc->af is AF_INET - that is,
> > >for IPv4.[...]
> > >An alternate idea would be to change the af value used for fwmarks,
> > >but this seems to be even less clean than the current (slightly broken)
> > >technique of using nf_inet_addr for IPv4 or IPv6 addresses, or fwmarks.
> >
> > If you use ->all, then using NFPROTO_UNSPEC as af
> > seems to me like a good match.
I am guessing that AF_UNSPEC is more appropriate than NFPROTO_UNSPEC.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
> That seems reasonable, though ip_vs_ct_in_get() would still
> need to use the real af for the cp->af == af and
> ip_vs_addr_equal(af, s_addr, &cp->caddr) portinos of the check.
It looks like checking for proto == IPPROTO_IP can tell us if
the destination is a fwmark. This is based on the assumption that
iph.protocol can never be IPPROTO_IP in ip_vs_sched_persist().
The following patch expresses these ideas as they crrently stand.
Fabien, is it possible for you to test this?
Index: net-next-2.6/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c
===================================================================
--- net-next-2.6.orig/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c 2009-04-28 20:37:48.000000000 +1000
+++ net-next-2.6/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c 2009-04-28 20:37:51.000000000 +1000
@@ -260,7 +260,10 @@ struct ip_vs_conn *ip_vs_ct_in_get
list_for_each_entry(cp, &ip_vs_conn_tab[hash], c_list) {
if (cp->af == af &&
ip_vs_addr_equal(af, s_addr, &cp->caddr) &&
- ip_vs_addr_equal(af, d_addr, &cp->vaddr) &&
+ /* protocol should only be IPPROTO_IP if
+ * d_addr is a fwmark */
+ ip_vs_addr_equal(protocol == IPPROTO_IP ? AF_UNSPEC : af,
+ d_addr, &cp->vaddr) &&
s_port == cp->cport && d_port == cp->vport &&
cp->flags & IP_VS_CONN_F_TEMPLATE &&
protocol == cp->protocol) {
@@ -698,7 +701,9 @@ ip_vs_conn_new(int af, int proto, const
cp->cport = cport;
ip_vs_addr_copy(af, &cp->vaddr, vaddr);
cp->vport = vport;
- ip_vs_addr_copy(af, &cp->daddr, daddr);
+ /* proto should only be IPPROTO_IP if d_addr is a fwmark */
+ ip_vs_addr_copy(proto == IPPROTO_IP ? AF_UNSPEC : af,
+ &cp->daddr, daddr);
cp->dport = dport;
cp->flags = flags;
spin_lock_init(&cp->lock);
Index: net-next-2.6/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c
===================================================================
--- net-next-2.6.orig/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c 2009-04-28 20:37:48.000000000 +1000
+++ net-next-2.6/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c 2009-04-28 20:37:51.000000000 +1000
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ ip_vs_sched_persist(struct ip_vs_service
*/
if (svc->fwmark) {
union nf_inet_addr fwmark = {
- .all = { 0, 0, 0, htonl(svc->fwmark) }
+ .ip = htonl(svc->fwmark)
};
ct = ip_vs_ct_in_get(svc->af, IPPROTO_IP, &snet, 0,
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ ip_vs_sched_persist(struct ip_vs_service
*/
if (svc->fwmark) {
union nf_inet_addr fwmark = {
- .all = { 0, 0, 0, htonl(svc->fwmark) }
+ .ip = htonl(svc->fwmark)
};
ct = ip_vs_conn_new(svc->af, IPPROTO_IP,
--
Simon Horman
VA Linux Systems Japan K.K. Satellite Lab in Sydney, Australia
H: www.vergenet.net/~horms/ W: www.valinux.co.jp/en
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
