Netdev Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
To: steffen.klassert@secunet.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	kuba@kernel.org, antony.antony@secunet.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
Subject: [PATCH ipsec 1/2] xfrm: make user policy API complete
Date: Tue,  7 Sep 2021 21:35:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210907193510.16487-2-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210907193510.16487-1-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>

From a userland POV, this API was based on some magic values:
 - dirmask and action were bitfields but meaning of bits
   (XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_*) are not exported;
 - action is confusing, if a bit is set, does it mean drop or accept?

Let's try to simplify this uapi by using explicit field and macros.

Fixes: 2d151d39073a ("xfrm: Add possibility to set the default to block if we have no policy")
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>
---
 include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h |  9 ++++++---
 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c      | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h b/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h
index b96c1ea7166d..3e605b09eb6f 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h
@@ -514,9 +514,12 @@ struct xfrm_user_offload {
 #define XFRM_OFFLOAD_INBOUND	2
 
 struct xfrm_userpolicy_default {
-#define XFRM_USERPOLICY_DIRMASK_MAX	(sizeof(__u8) * 8)
-	__u8				dirmask;
-	__u8				action;
+#define XFRM_USERPOLICY_UNSPEC	0
+#define XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK	1
+#define XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT	2
+	__u8				in;
+	__u8				fwd;
+	__u8				out;
 };
 
 #ifndef __KERNEL__
diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
index 03b66d154b2b..4e1c4dd53fe2 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
@@ -1966,16 +1966,21 @@ static int xfrm_set_default(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
 {
 	struct net *net = sock_net(skb->sk);
 	struct xfrm_userpolicy_default *up = nlmsg_data(nlh);
-	u8 dirmask;
-	u8 old_default = net->xfrm.policy_default;
 
-	if (up->dirmask >= XFRM_USERPOLICY_DIRMASK_MAX)
-		return -EINVAL;
+	if (up->in == XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default |= XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_IN;
+	else if (up->in == XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default &= ~XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_IN;
 
-	dirmask = (1 << up->dirmask) & XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_MASK;
+	if (up->fwd == XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default |= XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_FWD;
+	else if (up->fwd == XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default &= ~XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_FWD;
 
-	net->xfrm.policy_default = (old_default & (0xff ^ dirmask))
-				    | (up->action << up->dirmask);
+	if (up->out == XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default |= XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_OUT;
+	else if (up->out == XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT)
+		net->xfrm.policy_default &= ~XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_OUT;
 
 	rt_genid_bump_all(net);
 
@@ -2007,8 +2012,12 @@ static int xfrm_get_default(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
 
 	r_up = nlmsg_data(r_nlh);
 
-	r_up->action = ((net->xfrm.policy_default & (1 << up->dirmask)) >> up->dirmask);
-	r_up->dirmask = up->dirmask;
+	r_up->in = net->xfrm.policy_default & XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_IN ?
+			XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK : XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT;
+	r_up->fwd = net->xfrm.policy_default & XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_FWD ?
+			XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK : XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT;
+	r_up->out = net->xfrm.policy_default & XFRM_POL_DEFAULT_OUT ?
+			XFRM_USERPOLICY_BLOCK : XFRM_USERPOLICY_ACCEPT;
 	nlmsg_end(r_skb, r_nlh);
 
 	return nlmsg_unicast(net->xfrm.nlsk, r_skb, portid);
-- 
2.33.0


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-07 19:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20210331144843.GA25749@moon.secunet.de>
2021-07-16  9:15 ` [PATCH ipsec-next] xfrm: Add possibility to set the default to block if we have no policy Antony Antony
2021-07-18  3:26   ` kernel test robot
2021-07-18  7:11 ` [PATCH v2 " Antony Antony
2021-07-22  9:43   ` Steffen Klassert
2021-08-11 16:14   ` Nicolas Dichtel
2021-08-17 11:19     ` Antony Antony
2021-08-25 10:01       ` Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-07 19:35         ` [PATCH ipsec 0/2] xfrm: fix uapi for the default policy Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-07 19:35           ` Nicolas Dichtel [this message]
2021-09-07 19:35           ` [PATCH ipsec 2/2] xfrm: notify default policy on update Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-08  1:35             ` kernel test robot
2021-09-08  7:23               ` [PATCH ipsec v2 0/2] xfrm: fix uapi for the default policy Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-08  7:23                 ` [PATCH ipsec v2 1/2] xfrm: make user policy API complete Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-08  7:23                 ` [PATCH ipsec v2 2/2] xfrm: notify default policy on update Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-08  7:23                 ` [RFC PATCH iproute2 v2] xfrm: enable to manage default policies Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-14 14:46                 ` [PATCH ipsec v3 0/2] xfrm: fix uapi for the default policy Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-14 14:46                   ` [PATCH ipsec v3 1/2] xfrm: make user policy API complete Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-14 14:46                   ` [PATCH ipsec v3 2/2] xfrm: notify default policy on update Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-14 14:46                   ` [RFC PATCH iproute2 v2] xfrm: enable to manage default policies Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-15  9:19                   ` [PATCH ipsec v3 0/2] xfrm: fix uapi for the default policy Antony Antony
2021-09-15  9:55                     ` Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-17  7:06                   ` Steffen Klassert
2021-09-17  7:54                     ` Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-07 19:35           ` [RFC PATCH iproute2] xfrm: enable to manage default policies Nicolas Dichtel
2021-09-01 15:14   ` [PATCH v2 ipsec-next] xfrm: Add possibility to set the default to block if we have no policy Dmitry V. Levin
2021-09-02  9:05     ` Steffen Klassert
2021-09-19 22:40   ` Paul Cercueil
2021-09-21  6:33     ` Steffen Klassert

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=20210907193510.16487-2-nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
    --to=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
    --cc=antony.antony@secunet.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH ipsec 1/2] xfrm: make user policy API complete' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).