netdev - Re: [PATCH] af_packet: add interframe drop cmsg (v6)

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: <20091006142727.GC14360@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Date:	Tue, 6 Oct 2009 10:27:27 -0400
From:	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_packet: add interframe drop cmsg (v6)

On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 03:42:26PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Neil Horman a écrit :
> >
> > Actually, no, I don't think this is sufficient.  Looking at how the
> > implementation would work, we would query the sk_drop value in the recvmsg path,
> > but we wouldn't record it during frame enqueue, which would skew the data I need
> > to record.  Consider a queue of holding frames with sequence 1 2 3 4 101 102
> > 110.  Assume that missing sequence numbers were dropped during enqueue to the
> > sk_recieve_queue for lack of space.  Using the proposed above implementation,
> > the frames the gap gets reported with is determined by the scheduling of the
> > user space app, rather than the actual order in which they were lost.  I.e if
> > frames 5-100 were received & dropped immediately after the user process called
> > recvmsg for the first time, we would get the cmsg notification when we called
> > recvmsg and read frame 2, but if we lost those frames after the process called
> > recvmsg twice, we'd recognize the loss when we read frame 3.  With my current
> > implementation we recognize the gap on the next enqueued frame after we
> > encountered the loss, keeping everything in order, which is important.  We would
> > need to do that with whatever socket level option we'd consider implementing.
> > Not saying its not doable, but we need to take it into account, and its not a
> > straightforward as simply reading sk_drops on recvmsg.  We'd have to store the
> > sk_drop value in skb->mask universally or some such, and then teach sock_recvmsg
> > to check that field.
> > 
> >
> 
> Sorry cannot parse this, its too long to be true :)
> 
> If you count every af_packet drops in sk_drops, and every time you _enqueue_
> a frame in sk->receive_queue, you copy sk->sk_drops in skb->mark, you implement
> the thing. All this is protected by a lock.
> 
> sk->receive_queue is a FIFO, so there is no loss of information.
> 
> You only need to increment sk->sk_drops when necessary, if not already done in af_packet code.
> 
> If you dont trust me I can provide patch ;)
> 
No I trust you.  The problem (as you just mentioned) is that you didn't parse my
note.  We are saying the same thing.  If you want to implement this properly,
you have to do exactly as you said, take a snapshot of the sk_drops value for
the socket and store it in skb->mark, or some other unsued field, so that the
drop information travels along the queue with the frames.  As I was reading
Olivers note, it sounded to me as though he were proposing that we simply check
sk_drops when calling sock_recvmsg, which doesn't implement the same sort of
functionality.  I wanted to be sure that we were clear on what was trying to be
done.

Neil
> 
--
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