| Message ID | 20200212014107.110066-2-bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net,1/2] ipv6: Fix route replacement with dev-only route | expand |
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:41:07AM +0900, Benjamin Poirier wrote: > When splitting an RTA_MULTIPATH request into multiple routes and adding the > second and later components, we must not simply remove NLM_F_REPLACE but > instead replace it by NLM_F_CREATE. Otherwise, it may look like the netlink > message was malformed. > > For example, > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 \ > nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > results in the following warnings: > [ 1035.057019] IPv6: RTM_NEWROUTE with no NLM_F_CREATE or NLM_F_REPLACE > [ 1035.057517] IPv6: NLM_F_CREATE should be set when creating new route > > This patch makes the nlmsg sequence look equivalent for __ip6_ins_rt() to > what it would get if the multipath route had been added in multiple netlink > operations: > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 > ip route append 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > > Fixes: 27596472473a ("ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement") > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com> Reviewed-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> > --- > net/ipv6/route.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c > index 4fbdc60b4e07..2931224b674e 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c > @@ -5198,6 +5198,7 @@ static int ip6_route_multipath_add(struct fib6_config *cfg, > */ > cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags &= ~(NLM_F_EXCL | > NLM_F_REPLACE); > + cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags |= NLM_F_CREATE; > nhn++; > } > > -- > 2.25.0 >
On 2/11/20 6:41 PM, Benjamin Poirier wrote: > When splitting an RTA_MULTIPATH request into multiple routes and adding the > second and later components, we must not simply remove NLM_F_REPLACE but > instead replace it by NLM_F_CREATE. Otherwise, it may look like the netlink > message was malformed. > > For example, > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 \ > nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > results in the following warnings: > [ 1035.057019] IPv6: RTM_NEWROUTE with no NLM_F_CREATE or NLM_F_REPLACE > [ 1035.057517] IPv6: NLM_F_CREATE should be set when creating new route > > This patch makes the nlmsg sequence look equivalent for __ip6_ins_rt() to > what it would get if the multipath route had been added in multiple netlink > operations: > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 > ip route append 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > > Fixes: 27596472473a ("ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement") > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com> > --- > net/ipv6/route.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c > index 4fbdc60b4e07..2931224b674e 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c > @@ -5198,6 +5198,7 @@ static int ip6_route_multipath_add(struct fib6_config *cfg, > */ > cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags &= ~(NLM_F_EXCL | > NLM_F_REPLACE); > + cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags |= NLM_F_CREATE; > nhn++; > } > > Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
From: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 10:41:07 +0900 > When splitting an RTA_MULTIPATH request into multiple routes and adding the > second and later components, we must not simply remove NLM_F_REPLACE but > instead replace it by NLM_F_CREATE. Otherwise, it may look like the netlink > message was malformed. > > For example, > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 \ > nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > results in the following warnings: > [ 1035.057019] IPv6: RTM_NEWROUTE with no NLM_F_CREATE or NLM_F_REPLACE > [ 1035.057517] IPv6: NLM_F_CREATE should be set when creating new route > > This patch makes the nlmsg sequence look equivalent for __ip6_ins_rt() to > what it would get if the multipath route had been added in multiple netlink > operations: > ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 > ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 > ip route append 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 > > Fixes: 27596472473a ("ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement") > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com> Applied and queued up for -stable.
diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c index 4fbdc60b4e07..2931224b674e 100644 --- a/net/ipv6/route.c +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c @@ -5198,6 +5198,7 @@ static int ip6_route_multipath_add(struct fib6_config *cfg, */ cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags &= ~(NLM_F_EXCL | NLM_F_REPLACE); + cfg->fc_nlinfo.nlh->nlmsg_flags |= NLM_F_CREATE; nhn++; }
When splitting an RTA_MULTIPATH request into multiple routes and adding the second and later components, we must not simply remove NLM_F_REPLACE but instead replace it by NLM_F_CREATE. Otherwise, it may look like the netlink message was malformed. For example, ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 \ nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 results in the following warnings: [ 1035.057019] IPv6: RTM_NEWROUTE with no NLM_F_CREATE or NLM_F_REPLACE [ 1035.057517] IPv6: NLM_F_CREATE should be set when creating new route This patch makes the nlmsg sequence look equivalent for __ip6_ins_rt() to what it would get if the multipath route had been added in multiple netlink operations: ip route add 2001:db8::1/128 dev dummy0 ip route change 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:1 dev dummy0 ip route append 2001:db8::1/128 nexthop via fe80::30:2 dev dummy0 Fixes: 27596472473a ("ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement") Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@cumulusnetworks.com> --- net/ipv6/route.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)