linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tcp: splice as many packets as possible at once

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]

Message-ID: <20090109212400.GA3727@1wt.eu>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:24:00 +0100
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, ben@...s.com,
	jarkao2@...il.com, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: splice as many packets as possible at once

On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 09:51:17PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
(...)
> > Also, in your second mail, you're saying that your change
> > might return more data than requested by the user. I can't
> > find why, could you please explain to me, as I'm still quite
> > ignorant in this area ?
> 
> Well, I just tested various user programs and indeed got this
> strange result :
> 
> Here I call splice() with len=1000 (0x3e8), and you can see
> it gives a result of 1460 at the second call.

huh, not nice indeed!

While looking at the code to see how this could be possible, I
came across this minor thing (unrelated IMHO) :

	if (__skb_splice_bits(skb, &offset, &tlen, &spd))
		goto done;
>>>>>>	else if (!tlen)    <<<<<<
		goto done;

	/*
	 * now see if we have a frag_list to map
	 */
	if (skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list) {
		struct sk_buff *list = skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list;

		for (; list && tlen; list = list->next) {
			if (__skb_splice_bits(list, &offset, &tlen, &spd))
				break;
		}
	}

    done:

Above on the enlighted line, we'd better remove the else and leave a plain
"if (!tlen)". Otherwise, when the first call to __skb_splice_bits() zeroes
tlen, we still enter the if and evaluate the for condition for nothing. But
let's leave that for later.

> I suspect a bug in splice code, that my patch just exposed.

I've checked in skb_splice_bits() and below and can't see how we can move
more than the requested len.

However, with your change, I don't clearly see how we break out of
the loop in tcp_read_sock(). Maybe we first read 1000 then loop again
and read remaining data ? I suspect that we should at least exit when
((struct tcp_splice_state *)desc->arg.data)->len = 0.

At least that's something easy to add just before or after !desc->count
for a test.

Regards,
Willy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/