netdev - Re: Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?

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:	Mon, 2 Feb 2015 18:10:07 -0800
From:	Calvin Owens <calvinowens@...com>
To:	Alex Gartrell <agartrell@...com>
CC:	shengyong <shengyong1@...wei.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <yangyingling@...wei.com>,
	<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>, <hannes@...hat.com>,
	<lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: Question: should local address be expired when updating PMTU?

On Monday 02/02 at 16:52 -0800, Alex Gartrell wrote:
> Hello Shengyong,
> 
> > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > index b2614b2..b80317a 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > @@ -1136,6 +1136,9 @@ static void ip6_rt_update_pmtu(struct
> dst_entry *dst, struct sock *sk,
> >   {
> >          struct rt6_info *rt6 = (struct rt6_info*)dst;
> >
> > +       if (rt6->rt6i_flags & RTF_LOCAL)
> > +               return;
> > +
> >          dst_confirm(dst);
> >          if (mtu < dst_mtu(dst) && rt6->rt6i_dst.plen == 128) {
> >                  struct net *net = dev_net(dst->dev);
> >
> > So is this modification correct? Or how can we avoid such expiring? 
> 
> FWIW, we encountered this problem with IPVS tunneling.  Here's a
> patch done by Calvin (cc'ed) that fixes my attempted fix for this.
> We're not particularly proud of this...
> 
> At a high level, I don't think the RTF_LOCAL check was sufficient,
> but I didn't investigate deeply enough and hopefully Calvin can say
> why.

I honestly didn't spend much time at all finding the underlying cause
because it appeared to be fixed upstream: on 3.19-rc5 you get all 3
expected routes after the last step of my repro below. I just really
needed to get this working at the time, and the gross disgusting
horrible ugly awful [more negative adjectives] patch included below made
it work.

FWIW, the explanation I wrote down in my notes was:

"The absence of RTF_NONEXTHOP is causing COWs to happen, which are
always marked as RTF_CACHE. Somehow that's screwing things up in
rt6_do_redirect()"

That could be BS though, I don't at all remember how I came to that
conclusion. 

(/me resolves to write better notes in the future...)

Here's how to get the weird behavior on 3.10 (+stable):

$ sudo ip addr add local 4444::1 dev lo
### Now I have 2 routes in /proc/net/ipv6_route, a local and a non-local
### Both have the RTF_NONEXTHOP flag set (0x00200000)
$ sudo ip route add local 4444::1 dev lo
### Now I have 3 routes in /proc/net/ipv6_route to 4444::1
### Notice the new route does NOT have the RTF_NONEXTHOP flag set
$ sudo ip addr del local 4444::1 dev lo
### Now I just have the one route I created before
$ sudo ip addr add local 4444::1 dev lo
### And now I have 3 routes again
$ sudo ping6 4444::1
[blah blah blah successful ping]
$ sudo ip addr del local 4444::1 dev lo
$ sudo ip addr add local 4444::1 dev lo
### Still have 3 routes
$ sudo ip addr del local 4444::1 dev lo
### Now I just have my one route yet again
### Now, *without the address on lo*, talk to it (it works), then re-add it
$ ping6 4444::1
[blah blah blah successful ping]
$ sudo ip addr add local 4444::1 dev lo
### Now I only have 2 routes... WAT!?
### Notice the LOCAL (0x80000000) route doesn't have the RTF_NONEXTHOP flag set

Thanks,
Calvin

> diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> index f14d49b..c607a42 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> @@ -1159,18 +1159,18 @@ static void ip6_rt_update_pmtu(struct
> dst_entry *dst, struct sock *sk,
>                 }
>                 dst_metric_set(dst, RTAX_MTU, mtu);
> 
> -               /* FACEBOOK HACK: We need to not expire local non-expiring
> -                * routes so that we don't accidentally start blackholing
> -                * ipvs traffic when we happen to use it locally for
> -                * healthchecking (see ip_vs_xmit.c --
> -                * __ip_vs_get_out_rt_v6 invokes update_pmtu if the rt is
> -                * associated with a socket)
> -                * Alex Gartrell <agartrell@...com>
> +               /*
> +                * FACEBOOK HACK: Only expire routes that aren't destined for
> +                * the loopback interface.
> +                *
> +                * This prevents the strange route coalescing that happens when
> +                * you add an address to the loopback that had a route that had
> +                * been used when the address didn't exist from getting expired
> +                * and causing packet loss in shiv.
>                  */
> -               if (!(rt6->rt6i_flags & RTF_LOCAL) ||
> -                   (rt6->rt6i_flags & (RTF_EXPIRES | RTF_CACHE)))
> -                       rt6_update_expires(
> -                               rt6, net->ipv6.sysctl.ip6_rt_mtu_expires);
> +               if (!(dst->dev->flags & IFF_LOOPBACK))
> +                       rt6_update_expires(rt6,
> + net->ipv6.sysctl.ip6_rt_mtu_expires);
>         }
>  }
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Alex Gartrell <agartrell@...com>
--
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