netdev - Re: [PATCH] net-gre-gro: Fix a bug that breaks the forwarding path

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]

Date:	Wed, 5 Mar 2014 22:47:26 +0200
From:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	Joseph Gasparakis <joseph.gasparakis@...el.com>,
	Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-gre-gro: Fix a bug that breaks the forwarding path

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com> wrote:
> I am concerned that we are overloading the skb->encpasulation

Guys, so to sum up yesterday's messages on this thread -- do folks
think we can come up with better/proper definition for the
skb->encapsulation bit, or we have to make this multiple bits, or we
have (hopefully not too non linear) dependancy on proper
definitions/usage of the skb->ip_summed field?


Or.

> for instance if this is set in TX path meaning inner headers are valid,
> this should also be true of RX. It might be better if this field
> indicated characteristics of the packet independent of being in RX or
> TX path. For checksum, maybe we should have a separate encap_checksum
> field. Also, to be future proof may this should be two bits for the
> devices that can verify checksums in multiple levels of encapsulations
> (yes, I know this sounds absurd, but it's no more absurd than devices
> vendors taking it upon themselves to parse to some restricted set of
> encapsulations instead of just giving us the full packet checksum! :-)).

> I hope to have patches soon on fixing CHECKSUM_COMPLETE, I think it
> entails some more state in skb indicating offset and extent of
> checksum value in the packet. An like a said, we need to get out of
> the habit of stashing pseudo csums there (unless CHECKSUM_PARTIAL is
> set).
>
>> Also for Tx, skb->encapsulation should be the indication to the
>> driver that it can use the inner headers (i.e. they are valid) in the skb
>> in order to offload the inner csum.
--
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