netdev - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/6] xen-netback: coalesce slots before copying

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: <20130325190911.GC7004@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:09:11 +0000
From:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC:	Wei Liu <liuw@...w.name>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
	"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	"annie.li@...cle.com" <annie.li@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 5/6] xen-netback: coalesce slots before
 copying

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 06:29:29PM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> >>
> > 
> > Are you suggesting move the default macro value to header file? It is
> > just an estimation, I have no knowledge of the accurate maximum value,
> > so I think make it part of the protocol a bad idea.
> 
> How is the author of a new frontend supposed to know how many slots they
> can use per packet if it is not precisely defined?
> 

A new frontend shuold use the scheme you mentioned below to get the
maximum value. For old frontends that cannot be fixed, administrator can
configure max_skb_slots to accommodate their need.

> > Do you have a handle on the maximum value?
> 
> Backends should provide the value to the frontend via a xenstore key
> (e.g., max-slots-per-frame).  This value should be at least 18 (the
> historical value of MAX_SKB_FRAGS).
> 
> The frontend may use up to this specified value or 17 if the
> max-slots-per-frame key is missing.
> 
> Supporting at least 18 in the backend is required for existing
> frontends.  Limiting frontends to 17 allows them to work with all
> backends (including recent Linux version that only supported 17).
> 
> It's not clear why 19 or 20 were suggested as possible values.  I
> checked back to 2.6.18 and MAX_SKB_FRAGS there is (65536/PAGE_SIZE + 2)

Because the check is >= MAX_SKB_FRAGS originally and James Harper told
me that "Windows stops counting on 20".

> == 18.
> 
> Separately, it may be sensible for the backend to drop packets with more
> frags than max-slots-per-frame up to some threshold where anything more
> is considered malicious (i.e., 1 - 18 slots is a valid packet, 19-20 are
> dropped and 21 or more is a fatal error).
> 

Why drop the packet when we are able to process it? Frontend cannot know
it has crossed the line anyway.


Wei.
--
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