netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: fix psock_fanout selftest hash collision

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: <514B47A9.3080304@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:47:21 +0100
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: fix psock_fanout selftest hash collision

On 03/21/2013 06:27 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 03/21/2013 01:07 AM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:59 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
>>>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:33:44 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>
>>>>> From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 02:42:44 -0400
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix flaky results with PACKET_FANOUT_HASH depending on whether the
>>>>>> two flows hash into the same packet socket or not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also adds tests for PACKET_FANOUT_LB and PACKET_FANOUT_CPU and
>>>>>> replaces the counting method with a packet ring.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Applied, thanks.  I'll retest on my sparc64 box later today.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, it's still broken there:
>>>
>>> This looks like a new problem. Now the counters all stay zero.
>>>
>>> I am looking into it. I have not been able to reproduce this on my
>>> x86_64 so far, so just brought a sparc32 up in qemu. Had less luck
>>> with sparc64, but impressive that it works at all. Come to think of
>>> it, is this a 64-bit kernel with 32-bit userland? Perhaps that
>>> affects packet ring memory layout.
>>
>>
>> That can affect the ring buffer in case of TPACKET_V1, which is default
>> if not specified otherwise. See Documentation/networking/packet_mmap.txt
>> +514
>
> Thanks, Daniel. In that case, the following should fix it.
> Unfortunately, I don't have the hardware to verify, but it still
> passes on my platforms. Let me know if you prefer it as a regular
> patch instead of inline.

I can only tell you about x86_64: [PASS], although two ERRORs:

running psock_fanout test
--------------------
test: control single socket
test: control multiple sockets
test: datapath 0x0
info: count=0,0, expect=0,0
info: count=20,0, expect=15,5
ERROR: incorrect queue lengths
info: count=20,0, expect=20,5
ERROR: incorrect queue lengths
info: trying alternate ports (4)
test: datapath 0x0
[...]
OK. All tests passed
[PASS]
--
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