netdev - Re: Sending big Netlink messages to userspace

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: <4861282C.4000208@trash.net>
Date:	Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:00:28 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Julius Volz <juliusv@...gle.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Vince Busam <vbusam@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: Sending big Netlink messages to userspace

Julius Volz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> While adding a Netlink interface to IPVS, I've been wondering how to
> properly send very big messages to userspace and found these posts:
> 
> http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2007/03/06/214
> http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2007/03/07/2
> 
> Herbert writes in the second one, "Dumps should be done using 4K
> (NLMSG_GOODSIZE) skb's, where is the problem?" How is that meant?
> Should one manually split up dumps into several NLMSG_GOODSIZE
> messages or is there some mechanism for that?

Thats done automatically through netlink_dump_start().
You send one skb per dump callback invocation. The final
call returns a zero sized skb to indicate the end of the
dump.

> I need to send arbitrarily long lists to userspace and I'm already
> choosing a big enough size for nlmsg_new(), so I get no put failures
> while constructing the message. However, when receiving the data in
> userspace (with libnl), the receive callback is never called. An
> strace shows that MSG_TRUNC is set in the oversized message, so the
> data is never fully received.

You probably need to increase the receive buffer size in libnl.

> I just call nl_recvmsgs_default(sock) once (which does not return an
> error). Am I handling libnl incorrectly or do I need to do this
> differently on the kernel side?

It depends on what kind of attributes you're sending. In case
of top-level attributes you should only dump objects until
you reach NLMSG_GOODSIZE and continue during the next dump
callback invocation. Sending arbitary amounts of nested
data is more tricky, or might even be impossible currently.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html