netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/9] xen-netback: Handle guests with too many frags

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: <20131216180908.GC25969@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Dec 2013 18:09:08 +0000
From:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To:	Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>
CC:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jonathan.davies@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/9] xen-netback: Handle guests with too many
 frags

On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 04:10:42PM +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> On 13/12/13 15:43, Wei Liu wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:48:14PM +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> >>Xen network protocol had implicit dependency on MAX_SKB_FRAGS. Netback has to
> >>handle guests sending up to XEN_NETBK_LEGACY_SLOTS_MAX slots. To achieve that:
> >>- create a new skb
> >>- map the leftover slots to its frags (no linear buffer here!)
> >>- chain it to the previous through skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list
> >>- map them
> >>- copy the whole stuff into a brand new skb and send it to the stack
> >>- unmap the 2 old skb's pages
> >>
> >
> >Do you see performance regression with this approach?
> Well, it was pretty hard to reproduce that behaviour even with NFS.
> I don't think it happens often enough that it causes a noticable
> performance regression. Anyway, it would be just as slow as the
> current grant copy with coalescing, maybe a bit slower due to the
> unmapping. But at least we use a core network function to do the
> coalescing.
> Or, if you mean the generic performance, if this problem doesn't
> appear, then no, I don't see performance regression.
> 

OK, thanks for comfirming.

> >>Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>
> >>
> >>---
> >>  drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c |   99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>  1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
> >>index e26cdda..f6ed1c8 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
> >>@@ -906,11 +906,15 @@ static struct gnttab_map_grant_ref *xenvif_get_requests(struct xenvif *vif,
> >>  	u16 pending_idx = *((u16 *)skb->data);
> >>  	int start;
> >>  	pending_ring_idx_t index;
> >>-	unsigned int nr_slots;
> >>+	unsigned int nr_slots, frag_overflow = 0;
> >>
> >>  	/* At this point shinfo->nr_frags is in fact the number of
> >>  	 * slots, which can be as large as XEN_NETBK_LEGACY_SLOTS_MAX.
> >>  	 */
> >>+	if (shinfo->nr_frags > MAX_SKB_FRAGS) {
> >>+		frag_overflow = shinfo->nr_frags - MAX_SKB_FRAGS;
> >>+		shinfo->nr_frags = MAX_SKB_FRAGS;
> >>+	}
> >>  	nr_slots = shinfo->nr_frags;
> >>
> >
> >It is also probably better to check whether shinfo->nr_frags is too
> >large which makes frag_overflow > MAX_SKB_FRAGS. I know skb should be
> >already be valid at this point but it wouldn't hurt to be more careful.
> Ok, I've added this:
> 	/* At this point shinfo->nr_frags is in fact the number of
> 	 * slots, which can be as large as XEN_NETBK_LEGACY_SLOTS_MAX.
> 	 */
> +	if (shinfo->nr_frags > MAX_SKB_FRAGS) {
> +		if (shinfo->nr_frags > XEN_NETBK_LEGACY_SLOTS_MAX) return NULL;
> +		frag_overflow = shinfo->nr_frags - MAX_SKB_FRAGS;
> 

What I suggested is

   BUG_ON(frag_overflow > MAX_SKB_FRAGS)

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