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, 22 Feb 2023 09:46:02 +0000
From:   Sai Krishna Gajula <saikrishnag@...vell.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>,
        Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>,
        "richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC:     Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [net PATCH] octeontx2-pf: Recalculate UDP checksum for ptp 1-step
 sync packet

Hi Paolo,

Please see the responses inline.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 5:10 PM
> To: Sai Krishna Gajula <saikrishnag@...vell.com>; davem@...emloft.net;
> edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>;
> Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>; richardcochran@...il.com
> Cc: Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>
> Subject: Re: [net PATCH] octeontx2-pf: Recalculate UDP checksum for
> ptp 1-step sync packet
> 
> On Mon, 2023-02-20 at 17:50 +0530, Sai Krishna wrote:
> > From: Geetha sowjanya <gakula@...vell.com>
> >
> > When checksum offload is disabled in the driver via ethtool, the PTP
> > 1-step sync packets contain incorrect checksum, since the stack
> > calculates the checksum before driver updates PTP timestamp field in
> > the packet. This results in PTP packets getting dropped at the other
> > end. This patch fixes the issue by re-calculating the UDP checksum
> > after updating PTP timestamp field in the driver.
> >
> > Fixes: 2958d17a8984 ("octeontx2-pf: Add support for ptp 1-step mode on
> > CN10K silicon")
> > Signed-off-by: Geetha sowjanya <gakula@...vell.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@...vell.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sunil Kovvuri Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sai Krishna <saikrishnag@...vell.com>
> > ---
> >  .../marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_txrx.c         | 78 ++++++++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_txrx.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_txrx.c
> > index ef10aef3cda0..67345a3e2bba 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_txrx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/otx2_txrx.c
> > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> >  #include <net/tso.h>
> >  #include <linux/bpf.h>
> >  #include <linux/bpf_trace.h>
> > +#include <net/ip6_checksum.h>
> >
> >  #include "otx2_reg.h"
> >  #include "otx2_common.h"
> > @@ -699,7 +700,7 @@ static void otx2_sqe_add_ext(struct otx2_nic
> > *pfvf, struct otx2_snd_queue *sq,
> >
> >  static void otx2_sqe_add_mem(struct otx2_snd_queue *sq, int *offset,
> >  			     int alg, u64 iova, int ptp_offset,
> > -			     u64 base_ns, int udp_csum)
> > +			     u64 base_ns, bool udp_csum_crt)
> >  {
> >  	struct nix_sqe_mem_s *mem;
> >
> > @@ -711,7 +712,7 @@ static void otx2_sqe_add_mem(struct
> otx2_snd_queue
> > *sq, int *offset,
> >
> >  	if (ptp_offset) {
> >  		mem->start_offset = ptp_offset;
> > -		mem->udp_csum_crt = udp_csum;
> > +		mem->udp_csum_crt = !!udp_csum_crt;
> >  		mem->base_ns = base_ns;
> >  		mem->step_type = 1;
> >  	}
> > @@ -986,10 +987,11 @@ static bool
> otx2_validate_network_transport(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >  	return false;
> >  }
> >
> > -static bool otx2_ptp_is_sync(struct sk_buff *skb, int *offset, int
> > *udp_csum)
> > +static bool otx2_ptp_is_sync(struct sk_buff *skb, int *offset, bool
> > +*udp_csum_crt)
> >  {
> >  	struct ethhdr *eth = (struct ethhdr *)(skb->data);
> >  	u16 nix_offload_hlen = 0, inner_vhlen = 0;
> > +	bool udp_hdr_present = false, is_sync;
> >  	u8 *data = skb->data, *msgtype;
> >  	__be16 proto = eth->h_proto;
> >  	int network_depth = 0;
> > @@ -1029,45 +1031,83 @@ static bool otx2_ptp_is_sync(struct sk_buff
> *skb, int *offset, int *udp_csum)
> >  		if (!otx2_validate_network_transport(skb))
> >  			return false;
> >
> > -		*udp_csum = 1;
> >  		*offset = nix_offload_hlen + skb_transport_offset(skb) +
> >  			  sizeof(struct udphdr);
> > +		udp_hdr_present = true;
> > +
> >  	}
> >
> >  	msgtype = data + *offset;
> > -
> >  	/* Check PTP messageId is SYNC or not */
> > -	return (*msgtype & 0xf) == 0;
> > +	is_sync =  ((*msgtype & 0xf) == 0) ? true : false;
> 
> the above could be:
> 
> 	is_sync = !(*msgtype & 0xf);
> 

I will make changes and submit v2 patch.

> possibly more readable.
> 
> > +	if (is_sync) {
> > +		if (udp_hdr_present)
> > +			*udp_csum_crt = true;
> 
> or:
> 		*udp_csum_crt = udp_hdr_present;
> 
> that will make the code more compact.
> 

I will make changes and submit v2 patch.

> > +	} else {
> > +		*offset = 0;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return is_sync;
> >  }
> >
> >  static void otx2_set_txtstamp(struct otx2_nic *pfvf, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >  			      struct otx2_snd_queue *sq, int *offset)  {
> > +	struct ethhdr	*eth = (struct ethhdr *)(skb->data);
> >  	struct ptpv2_tstamp *origin_tstamp;
> > -	int ptp_offset = 0, udp_csum = 0;
> > +	bool udp_csum_crt = false;
> > +	unsigned int udphoff;
> >  	struct timespec64 ts;
> > +	int ptp_offset = 0;
> > +	__wsum skb_csum;
> >  	u64 iova;
> >
> >  	if (unlikely(!skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size &&
> >  		     (skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_HW_TSTAMP))) {
> > -		if (unlikely(pfvf->flags & OTX2_FLAG_PTP_ONESTEP_SYNC)) {
> > -			if (otx2_ptp_is_sync(skb, &ptp_offset, &udp_csum)) {
> > -				origin_tstamp = (struct ptpv2_tstamp *)
> > -						((u8 *)skb->data + ptp_offset
> +
> > -						 PTP_SYNC_SEC_OFFSET);
> > -				ts = ns_to_timespec64(pfvf->ptp->tstamp);
> > -				origin_tstamp->seconds_msb =
> htons((ts.tv_sec >> 32) & 0xffff);
> > -				origin_tstamp->seconds_lsb = htonl(ts.tv_sec
> & 0xffffffff);
> > -				origin_tstamp->nanoseconds =
> htonl(ts.tv_nsec);
> > -				/* Point to correction field in PTP packet */
> > -				ptp_offset += 8;
> > +		if (unlikely(pfvf->flags & OTX2_FLAG_PTP_ONESTEP_SYNC &&
> > +			     otx2_ptp_is_sync(skb, &ptp_offset,
> &udp_csum_crt))) {
> > +			origin_tstamp = (struct ptpv2_tstamp *)
> > +					((u8 *)skb->data + ptp_offset +
> > +					 PTP_SYNC_SEC_OFFSET);
> > +			ts = ns_to_timespec64(pfvf->ptp->tstamp);
> > +			origin_tstamp->seconds_msb = htons((ts.tv_sec >>
> 32) & 0xffff);
> > +			origin_tstamp->seconds_lsb = htonl(ts.tv_sec &
> 0xffffffff);
> > +			origin_tstamp->nanoseconds = htonl(ts.tv_nsec);
> > +			/* Point to correction field in PTP packet */
> > +			ptp_offset += 8;
> > +
> > +			/* When user disables hw checksum, stack calculates
> the csum,
> > +			 * but it does not cover ptp timestamp which is added
> later.
> > +			 * Recalculate the checksum manually considering the
> timestamp.
> > +			 */
> > +			if (udp_csum_crt) {
> > +				struct udphdr *uh = udp_hdr(skb);
> > +
> > +				if (skb->ip_summed != CHECKSUM_PARTIAL
> && uh->check != 0) {
> > +					udphoff = skb_transport_offset(skb);
> > +					uh->check = 0;
> > +					skb_csum = skb_checksum(skb,
> udphoff, skb->len - udphoff,
> > +								0);
> > +					if (ntohs(eth->h_proto) ==
> ETH_P_IPV6)
> > +						uh->check =
> csum_ipv6_magic(&ipv6_hdr(skb)->saddr,
> > +
> &ipv6_hdr(skb)->daddr,
> > +
> skb->len - udphoff,
> > +
> ipv6_hdr(skb)->nexthdr,
> > +
> skb_csum);
> > +					else
> > +						uh->check =
> csum_tcpudp_magic(ip_hdr(skb)->saddr,
> > +
> ip_hdr(skb)->daddr,
> > +
> skb->len - udphoff,
> > +
> IPPROTO_UDP,
> > +
> skb_csum);
> 
> Have you considered incremental csum updates instead? Possibly the code
> could be simpler and likely faster - not sure if the latter part is relevant in this
> case.
>

We don't expect any significant performance improvement with this for PTP sync packets.
So we didn't consider incremental csum updates.

Thanks,
Sai 

> Cheers,
> 
> Paolo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ