linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xen-netfront: Fix handling packets on compound pages with skb

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: <53E0D56E.7020205@citrix.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Aug 2014 14:00:30 +0100
From:	Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
CC:	<konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
	<david.vrabel@...rix.com>, <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
	<paul.durrant@...rix.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-netfront: Fix handling packets on compound pages
 with skb_segment

On 04/08/14 23:24, David Miller wrote:
> From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
> Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2014 10:11:10 +0100
>
>> On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 03:33:37PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 12:02:46 +0100
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 01:25:20PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>>>>> If you were to have a 64-slot TX queue, you ought to be able to handle
>>>>> this theoretical 51 slot SKB.
>>>>
>>>> There's two problems:
>>>> 1. IIRC a single page ring has 256 slots, allowing 64 slots packet
>>>>     yields 4 in-flight packets in worst case.
>>>> 2. Older netback could not handle this large number of slots and it's
>>>>     likely to deem the frontend malicious.
>>>>
>>>> For #1, we don't actually care that much if guest screws itself by
>>>> generating 64 slot packets. #2 is more concerning.
>>>
>>> How many slots can the older netback handle?
>>
>> I listed those two problems in the context "if we were to lift this
>> limit in the latest net-next tree", so "older netback" actually refers
>> to netback from 3.10 to 3.16.
>>
>> The current implementation allows the number of slots X:
>>   1. X <= 18, valid packet
>>   2. 18 < X < fatal_slot_count, dropped
>>   3. X >= fatal_slot_count, malicious frontend
>>
>> fatal_slot_count has default value of 20.
>
> Given what I've seen so far, I think the only option is to linearize
> the packet.
I think that would have more performance penalty than calling 
skb_gso_segment, but maybe I'm wrong.
>
> BTW, we do have a netdev->gso_max_segs tunable drivers can set, but
> it might not cover all of the cases you need to handle.
Indeed. Even a packet with one frag can be too scattered for us.
>
> Maybe we can create a similar tunable which triggers
> skb_needs_linearize() in the transmit path.
>
> The advantage of such a tunable is that this can be worked with
> inside of TCP to avoid creating such packets in the first place.
>
> For example, all of the MAX_SKB_FRAGS checks you see in net/ipv4/tcp.c
> could be replaced with tests against this new tunable in struct netdevice.
You would need to implement xennet_count_skb_frag_slots and count the 
slots for every skb heading to a device with this tunable set. And not 
just for TCP, but for any packet source.
I think it would be better to check for that tunable in 
dev_hard_start_xmit, and mask out the GSO bits in 'features' to force 
segmentation there. That would do essentially the same as this patch, 
but not in the netfront's start_xmit. One minor flaw is that it does one 
round of segmentation only, which doesn't handle the theoretical worst case.

Zoli
--
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/