From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53411C433FE for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 20:56:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.zx2c4.com (lists.zx2c4.com [165.227.139.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5496F61130 for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 20:56:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 5496F61130 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.zx2c4.com Received: by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id acff6dfd; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 20:56:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yb1-xb31.google.com (mail-yb1-xb31.google.com [2607:f8b0:4864:20::b31]) by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id 25a2456c (TLSv1.3:AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO) for ; Thu, 7 Oct 2021 20:56:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yb1-xb31.google.com with SMTP id u32so16273224ybd.9 for ; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 13:56:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OAwhoQ8WnPjiR05kpnMMYY2kjXq1+16g/k5+6wSGx6g=; b=JOOJ48o9O8li5/RVr1K91U3pJsEcml3OhD2uhsKlydGuE9Dnvcj6fqA5qrn0QIzp26 jpI04Ob9Vs3glArfc7zc+dJmCn4+0B6pHYoSOYedU9A+uPrRun2+hX4hqzSUanG0tCil p23NiCVSvt4CG+HrfOny84BXBMAEDvBj/uNbB8X1mYhqlvsm5tNeumKC9xCgb/n/E+JI K7yCwS0u08MD1Cxwq8wVQpZliHkOO67LkdTYW4zFcMOcQ6mMsVQo77n8jUld+El/NIkN feBXz3F28ZmLz6aKFSIRqfBFKIdUSU8myLSaOIOqBdrmbm6bC1he5fuVcqXeuZWBit8B qZLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OAwhoQ8WnPjiR05kpnMMYY2kjXq1+16g/k5+6wSGx6g=; b=pdKTxYJvjo6lAgOEMJGpzJLGVA3Iw94DDuh3uXLAXJefIILl5aZ/SjXWATKqFE7B3q aHbHHmkyS9vVSHNhYUzHdtUCsM57E9HccYHcYxAU0yo5Dn+NmU6F5ZDKPDUDjiqfjkDT 5/gOS3ZNBzj53OFSIa982B8sTuE3Vv74zNp3A98Q6Lgb6P22wMopMUdxZhWgDvOYolE3 9nb7L7Q3pV+O63+yeftytrysuTqRfdvTicewaTxmavsf35Canw2lz8HyA1Mck40cN8FV URvSi3fXH129fFm5vHY1jn/O2cXCuUHBmCs3FOjRenoOfWUm1XJJ5GEI6tWisUzo9vLp uTGA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530RpOZY/b0ZHxfWnlZ3C0Dee+MSCZD89kMFVh/VYJijs9oG9Mjr svr2+NEo/bfOFlzT9V3mcUmLs3gO8m7Vf1Hx8+I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzGsVJVt21objpdGhNHBHCI7Jy0qwSEx4beX4m1GCqBTDIC+pOXICVrv7MXHOlyEkD3/h0Hb/R39nshNdumIUI= X-Received: by 2002:a25:bb0b:: with SMTP id z11mr7234921ybg.108.1633640165017; Thu, 07 Oct 2021 13:56:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210928031938.17902-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Cong Wang Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2021 13:55:54 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Patch net] wireguard: preserve skb->mark on ingress side To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: Netdev , WireGuard mailing list , Cong Wang , Peilin Ye Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" Hi, Jason On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 8:27 PM Cong Wang wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 8:22 PM Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > Hi Cong, > > > > I'm not so sure this makes sense, as the inner packet is in fact > > totally different. If you want to distinguish the ingress interface, > > The contents are definitely different, but skb itself is the same. > > Please also take a look at other tunnels, they all preserve this > in similar ways, that is, comparing net namespaces. Any reason > why wireguard is so different from other tunnels? Any response? Thanks.