netdev - Re: An inconsistency/bug in ingress netem timestamps

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 16 Apr 2009 08:09:56 -0400
From:	Alex Sidorenko <alexandre.sidorenko@...com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	"jarkao2@...il.com" <jarkao2@...il.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: An inconsistency/bug in ingress netem timestamps

On April 16, 2009 06:10:34 am David Miller wrote:
> Since IFB completely bypasses netif_rx() and netif_receive_skb() I
> think it should unconditionally set skb->tstamp.tv64 to zero and
> invoke net_timestamp()

>From ifb.c (2.6.29):

 109                if (from & AT_EGRESS) {
 110                        dp->st_rx_frm_egr++;
 111                        dev_queue_xmit(skb);
 112                } else if (from & AT_INGRESS) {
 113                        dp->st_rx_frm_ing++;
 114                        skb_pull(skb, skb->dev->hard_header_len);
 115                        netif_rx(skb);
 116                }

Adding skb->tstamp.tv64 = 0 between lines 114 and 115 made 'ping' report the 
delay as expected (tested on 2.6.28)

Alex


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandre Sidorenko             email: asid@...com
WTEC Linux			Hewlett-Packard (Canada)
------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html