netdev - Re: [PATCH net v6 1/2] net: sched: tbf: fix the calculation of max

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: <52A676B8.4040300@huawei.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:04:40 +0800
From:	Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
CC:	<davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <brouer@...hat.com>, <jpirko@...hat.com>,
	<jbrouer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v6 1/2] net: sched: tbf: fix the calculation of max_size

On 2013/12/9 21:11, David Laight wrote:
>> From: Yang Yingliang [mailto:yangyingliang@...wei.com]
>> On 2013/12/9 18:07, David Laight wrote:
>>>> From: Yang Yingliang
>>>> On 2013/12/6 18:56, David Laight wrote:
>>>>>> From: Yang Yingliang
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> You are multiplying two values then dividing by 10**9
>>>>> I'd guess that the intermediate value might exceed 2**64.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +	if (unlikely(r->linklayer == TC_LINKLAYER_ATM))
>>>>>> +		len = (len / 53) * 48;
>>>>>
>>>>> You probably want to do the multiply first.
>>>>> But why not scale rate_bytes_ps instead.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When the linklayer is ATM, the formula to calculate tokens is:
>>>>
>>>> ((u64)(DIV_ROUND_UP(len,48)*53) * r->mult) >> r->shift
>>>>
>>>> So, I scale len here.
>>>
>>> Seems to me that there are a lot of unnecessary multiplies and
>>> divides going on here.
>>> Looks to me like the code was originally written to require one
>>> multiply and one shift for each packet.
>>
>> The way to calc tokens in psched_l2t_ns() means:
>> we got a payload which length is 'len'. To get the actual size we
>> need send, round len up to a multiple of 53. After getting the
>> size, we do multiply and shift to calculate tokens that we need.
>>
>>>
>>> In any case the latter code is allowing for more of the ATM cell
>>> overhead. I'm not at all sure the intent is to remove that when
>>> setting up the constants.
>>>
>>> OTOH should this code be worrying about the packet overheads at all?
>>> Does it add in the ethernet pre-emable, CRC and inter packet gap?
>>
>> This overhead is sent from userspace by tc.
>>
>>>
>>> I'd guess that the most the ATM code should do it round the length
>>> up to a multiple of 48 (user payload in a cell).
>>
>> 53 is ATM cell size include header, sending a header needs tokens as
>> well. I'd guess round the length up to a multiple of 53 in psched_l2t_ns()
>> is necessary.
> 
> The point I'm trying to make is that in one place you multiply by 53/48
> and in the other you multiply be 48/53.
> These two operations almost certainly cancel each other out.
> Or would modulo small rounding errors if you did the multiplies first.
> So why do either of them?

Current kernel does multiplication by 53/48 to calculate tokens in
psched_l2t_ns(). It expands a packet length. So I need reduce the
length which is used as max_size in psched_ns_t2l(), or it will be
too big to get enough tokens.

len = (len / 53) * 48;
Here I do division first, because the length to calculate tokens is
53bytes at least. If len < 53, means that no packet can pass, we
should set len to 0.

Regards,
Yang

> 
> Whether you should be rounding up ATM data to a whole number of cells
> is a different question entirely.
> 
> 	David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 


--
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