netdev - Re: Possible bugfix for AF_UNIX, SOCK

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: <CAFJW8X_zvqVP+ZZO1BOFHa0XeywnieszMoSub_VKMhoy55J4Og@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:36:29 +0100
From:	Piergiorgio Beruto <piergiorgio.beruto@...il.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Possible bugfix for AF_UNIX, SOCK_SEQPACKET sockets

Ok, I take the recvmsg( ... MSG_PEEK|MSG_TRUNC) *USUALLY* returns the
size of the next packet (which would solve my problem without any ugly
& deprecated ioctl) when passing a "too small buffer" but as you said
AF_UNIX sockets do not implement this behavior...

Are you proposing to implement such patch in the kernel to fix this?
Do you want me to test it?


Il 15 febbraio 2012 13:42, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> ha scritto:
> Le mercredi 15 février 2012 à 11:43 +0100, Piergiorgio Beruto a écrit :
>
>> Yes, there's nothing that "doesn't work", it's a matter of performance
>> (I am working on strong embedded so I'm quite concerned about both
>> memory usage and "speed").
>>
>> The problem is that when the socket queue is filled with short sized
>> packets, dequeue operation would allocate a lot of "big" chunks of
>> memory, progressively smaller (first one the size of the queue, second
>> one = queue size - first packet size and so on).
>>
>> Besides the waste of memory, you get less perfromance as malloc()
>> would use the heap or mmap() depending on the size of the chunk
>> (usually 64 bytes) and  the use of mmap is more memory efficient but
>> quite slower.
>
> I see
>
>> Ok, that's why I asked :) But if you agree with my objection regarding
>> performance, what about adding a brand new (linux only) ioctl which
>> implements the other behaviour? So the code would look something like
>> this:
>>
>> case SIOCINQ:
>> case SIOCPSZ:     //// new packet size ioctl
>>        {
>>                struct sk_buff *skb;
>>
>>                if (sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) {
>>                        err = -EINVAL;
>>                        break;
>>                }
>>
>>                spin_lock(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock);
>>                if ((sk->sk_type == SOCK_STREAM ||
>>                    sk->sk_type == SOCK_SEQPACKET) &&
>>                    ioctl_code != SIOCPSZ) {       //// have SIOCPSZ
>> behave as for datagram sockets
>>                        skb_queue_walk(&sk->sk_receive_queue, skb)
>>                                amount += skb->len;
>>                } else {
>>                        skb = skb_peek(&sk->sk_receive_queue);
>>                        if (skb)
>>                                amount = skb->len;
>>                }
>>                spin_unlock(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock);
>>                err = put_user(amount, (int __user *)arg);
>>                break;
>>        }
>
> ioctl() are deprecated, and such a change has ramification (for example
> on strace tool)
>
> You could use a recvmsg( ... MSG_PEEK|MSG_TRUNC) to get size of next
> packet (passing a small buffer)
>
> Ah... it seems af_unix doesnt handle MSG_TRUNC semantic as
> UDP/RAW/NETLINK sockets do.
>
>
> diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
> index 85d3bb7..70d9414 100644
> --- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
> +++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
> @@ -1824,7 +1824,7 @@ static int unix_dgram_recvmsg(struct kiocb *iocb, struct socket *sock,
>                if (UNIXCB(skb).fp)
>                        siocb->scm->fp = scm_fp_dup(UNIXCB(skb).fp);
>        }
> -       err = size;
> +       err = (flags & MSG_TRUNC) ? skb->len : size;
>
>        scm_recv(sock, msg, siocb->scm, flags);
>
>
>
--
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