netdev - Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Enable RFS sk_rxhash tracking for ipv6 sockets (v2)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:42:22 -0400
From:	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, pekkas@...core.fi,
	jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net,
	therbert@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: Enable RFS sk_rxhash tracking for ipv6 sockets (v2)

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 01:07:49PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> Date: Wed,  6 Apr 2011 15:37:27 -0400
> 
> > properly record sk_rxhash in ipv6 sockets (v2)
> > 
> > Noticed while working on another project that flows to sockets which I had open
> > on a test systems weren't getting steered properly when I had RFS enabled.
> > Looking more closely I found that:
> > 
> > 1) The affected sockets were all ipv6
> > 2) They weren't getting steered because sk->sk_rxhash was never set from the
> > incomming skbs on that socket.
> > 
> > This was occuring because there are several points in the IPv4 tcp and udp code
> > which save the rxhash value when a new connection is established.  Those calls
> > to sock_rps_save_rxhash were never added to the corresponding ipv6 code paths.
> > This patch adds those calls.  Tested by myself to properly enable RFS
> > functionalty on ipv6.
> > 
> > Change notes:
> > v2:
> > 	Filtered UDP to only arm RFS on bound sockets (Eric Dumazet)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
> 
> Ok, I've decided to apply this to net-2.6
> 
> The current behavior even surprised me, I was pretty sure we had added
> the hooks to both ipv4 and ipv6.
> 
> Thanks a lot Neil.
> 
Thanks Dave, I was kind of suprised too, but we definately weren't recording the
rxhash. FWIW It doesn't appear to be a regression.  I can't find where in the
history we ever had the hooks.  Perhaps at one point tcp and udp rcv paths were
common between ipv4 and 6 address families, and then we bifurcated without
replicating the sock_rps_save_rxhash calls?

Neil
 
--
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