linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] riscv: Checksum header

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: <059f17e6-e240-40fa-8742-7844ad3b3502@app.fastmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2023 22:52:22 +0200
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Charlie Jenkins" <charlie@...osinc.com>,
        "Wang, Xiao W" <xiao.w.wang@...el.com>
Cc:     Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Albert Ou" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Conor Dooley" <conor@...nel.org>,
        "David Laight" <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@...belt.com>,
        "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] riscv: Checksum header

On Wed, Oct 25, 2023, at 22:37, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 06:50:05AM +0000, Wang, Xiao W wrote:

>> > +
>> > +/*
>> > + * Quickly compute an IP checksum with the assumption that IPv4 headers
>> > will
>> > + * always be in multiples of 32-bits, and have an ihl of at least 5.
>> > + * @ihl is the number of 32 bit segments and must be greater than or equal
>> > to 5.
>> > + * @iph is assumed to be word aligned.
>> 
>> Not sure if the assumption is always true. It looks the implementation in "lib/checksum.c" doesn't take this assumption.
>> The ip header can comes after a 14-Byte ether header, which may start from a word-aligned or DMA friendly address.
>
> While lib/checksum.c does not make this assumption, other architectures
> (x86, ARM, powerpc, mips, arc) do make this assumption. Architectures
> seem to only align the header on a word boundary in do_csum. I worry
> that the benefit of aligning iph in this "fast" csum function would
> disproportionately impact hardware that has fast misaligned accesses.

Most architectures set NET_IP_ALIGN to '2', which is intended
to have the IP header at a 32-bit aligned address, though
some other targets don't bother:

arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h:#define NET_IP_ALIGN 0
arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h:#define NET_IP_ALIGN       0
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:#define NET_IP_ALIGN   0
include/linux/skbuff.h:#define NET_IP_ALIGN     2

I think it's considered a driver bug if an SKB ends up
with a misaligned IP header, but it's also something that
some of the more obscure drivers get wrong.

    Arnd