Message-ID: <001801d742db$68ab8060$3a028120$@samsung.com>
Date:   Fri, 7 May 2021 09:53:34 +0900
From:   "Dongseok Yi" <dseok.yi@...sung.com>
To:     "'Willem de Bruijn'" <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     "'Daniel Borkmann'" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        "'bpf'" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "'Alexei Starovoitov'" <ast@...nel.org>,
        "'Andrii Nakryiko'" <andrii@...nel.org>,
        "'Martin KaFai Lau'" <kafai@...com>,
        "'Song Liu'" <songliubraving@...com>,
        "'Yonghong Song'" <yhs@...com>,
        "'John Fastabend'" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        "'KP Singh'" <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        "'David S. Miller'" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "'Jakub Kicinski'" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "'Network Development'" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "'linux-kernel'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH bpf] bpf: check for data_len before upgrading mss when 6
 to 4

On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 02:21:37PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 10:27 PM Dongseok Yi <dseok.yi@...sung.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 09:45:37PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 8:45 PM Dongseok Yi <dseok.yi@...sung.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 10:55:10PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > > On 4/29/21 12:08 PM, Dongseok Yi wrote:
> > > > > > tcp_gso_segment check for the size of GROed payload if it is bigger
> > > > > > than the mss. bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4 increases mss, but the mss can be
> > > > > > bigger than the size of GROed payload unexpectedly if data_len is not
> > > > > > big enough.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Assume that skb gso_size = 1372 and data_len = 8. bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4
> > >
> > > Is this a typo and is this intended to read skb->data_len = 1380?
> >
> > This is not a typo. I intended skb->data_len = 8.
> >
> > >
> > > The issue is that payload length (1380) is greater than mss with ipv6
> > > (1372), but less than mss with ipv4 (1392).
> > >
> > > I don't understand data_len = 8 or why the patch compares
> > > skb->data_len to len_diff (20).
> >
> > skb_gro_receive():
> >         unsigned int len = skb_gro_len(skb);
> >         [...]
> > done:
> >         NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->count++;
> >         p->data_len += len;
> >
> > head_skb's data_len is the sum of skb_gro_len for each skb of the frags.
> > data_len could be 8 if server sent a small size packet and it is GROed
> > to head_skb.
> >
> > Please let me know if I am missing something.
> 
> This is my understanding of the data path. This is a forwarding path
> for TCP traffic.
> 
> GRO is enabled and will coalesce multiple segments into a single large
> packet. In bad cases, the coalesced packet payload is > MSS, but < MSS
> + 20.
> 
> Somewhere between GRO and GSO you have a BPF program that converts the
> IPv6 address to IPv4.

Your understanding is right. The data path is GRO -> BPF 6 to 4 ->
GSO.

> 
> There is no concept of head_skb at the time of this BPF program. It is
> a single SKB, with an skb linear part and multiple data items in the
> frags (no frag_list).

Sorry for the confusion. head_skb what I mentioned was a skb linear
part. I'm considering a single SKB with frags too.

> 
> When entering the GSO stack, this single skb now has a payload length
> < MSS. So it would just make a valid TCP packet on its own?
> 
> skb_gro_len is only relevant inside the GRO stack. It internally casts
> the skb->cb[] to NAPI_GRO_CB. This field is a scratch area that may be
> reused for other purposes later by other layers of the datapath. It is
> not safe to read this inside bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4.

The condition what I made uses skb->data_len not skb_gro_len. Does
skb->data_len have a different meaning on each layer? As I know,
data_len indicates the amount of frags or frag_list. skb->data_len
should be > 20 in the sample case because the payload size of the skb
linear part is the same with mss.

We can modify netif_needs_gso as another option to hit
skb_needs_linearize in validate_xmit_skb. But I think we should compare
skb->gso_size and skb->data_len too to check if mss exceed a payload
size.

> 
> 
> > >
> > > One simple solution if this packet no longer needs to be segmented
> > > might be to reset the gso_type completely.
> >
> > I am not sure gso_type can be cleared even when GSO is needed.
> >
> > >
> > > In general, I would advocate using BPF_F_ADJ_ROOM_FIXED_GSO. When
> > > converting from IPv6 to IPv4, fixed gso will end up building packets
> > > that are slightly below the MTU. That opportunity cost is negligible
> > > (especially with TSO). Unfortunately, I see that that flag is
> > > available for bpf_skb_adjust_room but not for bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > would increse the gso_size to 1392. tcp_gso_segment will get an error
> > > > > > with 1380 <= 1392.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Check for the size of GROed payload if it is really bigger than target
> > > > > > mss when increase mss.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: 6578171a7ff0 (bpf: add bpf_skb_change_proto helper)
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dongseok Yi <dseok.yi@...sung.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >   net/core/filter.c | 4 +++-
> > > > > >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > index 9323d34..3f79e3c 100644
> > > > > > --- a/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> > > > > > @@ -3308,7 +3308,9 @@ static int bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > > > >             }
> > > > > >
> > > > > >             /* Due to IPv4 header, MSS can be upgraded. */
> > > > > > -           skb_increase_gso_size(shinfo, len_diff);
> > > > > > +           if (skb->data_len > len_diff)
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you elaborate some more on what this has to do with data_len specifically
> > > > > here? I'm not sure I follow exactly your above commit description. Are you saying
> > > > > that you're hitting in tcp_gso_segment():
> > > > >
> > > > >          [...]
> > > > >          mss = skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size;
> > > > >          if (unlikely(skb->len <= mss))
> > > > >                  goto out;
> > > > >          [...]
> > > >
> > > > Yes, right
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Please provide more context on the bug, thanks!
> > > >
> > > > tcp_gso_segment():
> > > >         [...]
> > > >         __skb_pull(skb, thlen);
> > > >
> > > >         mss = skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size;
> > > >         if (unlikely(skb->len <= mss))
> > > >         [...]
> > > >
> > > > skb->len will have total GROed TCP payload size after __skb_pull.
> > > > skb->len <= mss will not be happened in a normal GROed situation. But
> > > > bpf_skb_proto_6_to_4 would upgrade MSS by increasing gso_size, it can
> > > > hit an error condition.
> > > >
> > > > We should ensure the following condition.
> > > > total GROed TCP payload > the original mss + (IPv6 size - IPv4 size)
> > > >
> > > > Due to
> > > > total GROed TCP payload = the original mss + skb->data_len
> > > > IPv6 size - IPv4 size = len_diff
> > > >
> > > > Finally, we can get the condition.
> > > > skb->data_len > len_diff
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > +                   skb_increase_gso_size(shinfo, len_diff);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >             /* Header must be checked, and gso_segs recomputed. */
> > > > > >             shinfo->gso_type |= SKB_GSO_DODGY;
> > > > > >             shinfo->gso_segs = 0;
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >

Powered by blists - more mailing lists