netdev - Re: [PATCH] IPv4: skip loopback checksums in ip

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]

Message-Id: <20091019.172455.139931137.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	torsten.schmidt@...06.tu-chemnitz.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv4: skip loopback checksums in ip_rcv()

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:42:02 +0200

> One bit could be corrupted in iph, and ntohl(iph->daddr) becomes 0x7fxxyyzz,
> we then accept a bogus frame. This is a RFC violation.
> 
> This also slows down non loopback devices, adding an extra test.
> 
> ip_fast_csum() is really fast (about 16 instructions).

Also loopback doesn't mean anything.  That packet could
be mirrored and sent externally via packet scheduler
rules and actions.

And for this specific case, the savings are absolutely zero.

We've brought the whole damn IP header into the CPU cache and
that is the real cost.  The calculation is something like 12
instructions, maybe 6 cycles on a modern cpu, which is nothing.
--
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