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  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:	Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:08:52 -0700
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:	seugene@...vell.com, Andrew Lunn <lunn@...n.ch>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...tstofly.org
Subject: Re: DSA and skb->protocol

Hi Andrew,

On 09/14/2014 08:37 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Florian
> 
> I've been debugging a WARNING when using DSA with a D-Link
> DIR665. I've had reports of the same warning with another device.
> 
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2014 at net/core/dev.c:2260 skb_warn_bad_offload+0xd0/0x104()
> mv643xx_eth_port: caps=(0x0000000400014803, 0x00000000001b482b) len=1722 data_len=16 gso_size=1448 gso_type=1 gso_segs 2 ip_summed=3 encapsulation 0 features 400014801
> Modules linked in:
> CPU: 0 PID: 2014 Comm: sshd Tainted: G        W      3.17.0-rc1-00007-g2f06b2c08099-dirty #228
> [<c000e2a0>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c000bd88>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> [<c000bd88>] (show_stack) from [<c0016db8>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x6c/0x8c)
> [<c0016db8>] (warn_slowpath_common) from [<c0016e08>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x30/0x40)
> [<c0016e08>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04ebad4>] (skb_warn_bad_offload+0xd0/0x104)
> [<c04ebad4>] (skb_warn_bad_offload) from [<c03eea5c>] (skb_checksum_help+0x160/0x170)
> [<c03eea5c>] (skb_checksum_help) from [<c03eef40>] (dev_hard_start_xmit+0x3f8/0x4c0)
> [<c03eef40>] (dev_hard_start_xmit) from [<c04071ec>] (sch_direct_xmit+0x148/0x250)
> [<c04071ec>] (sch_direct_xmit) from [<c03ef280>] (__dev_queue_xmit+0x278/0x5f4)
> [<c03ef280>] (__dev_queue_xmit) from [<c04719b8>] (edsa_xmit+0xf8/0x2c8)
> [<c04719b8>] (edsa_xmit) from [<c03eee24>] (dev_hard_start_xmit+0x2dc/0x4c0)
> [<c03eee24>] (dev_hard_start_xmit) from [<c03ef3cc>] (__dev_queue_xmit+0x3c4/0x5f4)
> [<c03ef3cc>] (__dev_queue_xmit) from [<c0415e88>] (ip_finish_output+0x64c/0x920)
> [<c0415e88>] (ip_finish_output) from [<c0416e2c>] (ip_local_out_sk+0x34/0x38)
> [<c0416e2c>] (ip_local_out_sk) from [<c0417144>] (ip_queue_xmit+0x128/0x388)
> [<c0417144>] (ip_queue_xmit) from [<c042caa8>] (tcp_transmit_skb+0x534/0x93c)
> [<c042caa8>] (tcp_transmit_skb) from [<c042cff8>] (tcp_write_xmit+0x148/0xbf8)
> [<c042cff8>] (tcp_write_xmit) from [<c042dd7c>] (__tcp_push_pending_frames+0x30/0x9c)
> [<c042dd7c>] (__tcp_push_pending_frames) from [<c041fbc8>] (tcp_sendmsg+0xc0/0xcec)
> [<c041fbc8>] (tcp_sendmsg) from [<c0445710>] (inet_sendmsg+0x3c/0x70)
> [<c0445710>] (inet_sendmsg) from [<c03d7d5c>] (sock_aio_write+0xcc/0xec)
> [<c03d7d5c>] (sock_aio_write) from [<c00bb218>] (do_sync_write+0x7c/0xa4)
> [<c00bb218>] (do_sync_write) from [<c00bbc40>] (vfs_write+0x108/0x1b0)
> [<c00bbc40>] (vfs_write) from [<c00bc214>] (SyS_write+0x40/0x94)
> [<c00bc214>] (SyS_write) from [<c0009480>] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x2c)
> ---[ end trace b1b02d15aba4766a ]---
> 
> I think i understand what is going on, and one of your recent patches
> may indicate you have seen something similar.
> 
> int dev_hard_start_xmit() we have:
> 
> 2607 
> 2608                 features = netif_skb_features(skb);
> 
> ...
> 2637                         /* If packet is not checksummed and device does not
> 2638                          * support checksumming for this protocol, complete
> 2639                          * checksumming here.
> 2640                          */
> 2641                         if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL) {
> 2642                                 if (skb->encapsulation)
> 2643                                         skb_set_inner_transport_header(skb,
> 2644                                                 skb_checksum_start_offset(skb));
> 2645                                 else
> 2646                                         skb_set_transport_header(skb,
> 2647                                                 skb_checksum_start_offset(skb));
> 2648                                 if (!(features & NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM) &&
> 2649                                      skb_checksum_help(skb))
> 2650                                         goto out_kfree_skb;
> 2651                         }
> 
> This packet is CHECKSUM_PARTIAL, but it is also a GSO packet, with two
> segments, so the skb_checksum_help() is throwing the warning. It is
> expected that the hardware with do the checksum when using GSO. The
> reason it is trying to do software checksums, not hardware, is because
> features does not indicate the protocol is supported by hardware
> checksumming. This i initially thought was odd, since this is a TCP/IP
> packet, as you can see from the stack trace. However, 
> 
> netif_skb_features(skb) calls harmonize_features() which calls
> can_checksum_protocol():
> 
> 3206 static inline bool can_checksum_protocol(netdev_features_t features,
> 3207                                          __be16 protocol)
> 3208 {
> 3209         return ((features & NETIF_F_GEN_CSUM) ||
> 3210                 ((features & NETIF_F_V4_CSUM) &&
> 3211                  protocol == htons(ETH_P_IP)) ||
> 3212                 ((features & NETIF_F_V6_CSUM) &&
> 3213                  protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6)) ||
> 3214                 ((features & NETIF_F_FCOE_CRC) &&
> 3215                  protocol == htons(ETH_P_FCOE)));
> 3216 }
> 
> However looking in the skb, we see protocol is now ETH_P_EDSA, not
> ETH_P_IP. Hence the hardware does not support this protocol.

Usually, the hardware needs to be told there is a DSA/EDSA tag before
the actual Ethernet frame, I don't have the mv643xx_eth documentation
handy, but I suppose there should be something like this available.

> 
> This protocol value is because edsa_xmit() changes it in the slave
> device TX path.
> 
> Your patch "net: dsa: change tag_protocol to an enum"
> has a hunk:
> 
> diff --git a/net/dsa/tag_brcm.c b/net/dsa/tag_brcm.c
> index e0b759ec209e..8fbc21c0de78 100644
> --- a/net/dsa/tag_brcm.c
> +++ b/net/dsa/tag_brcm.c
> @@ -91,7 +91,6 @@ static netdev_tx_t brcm_tag_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
>         /* Queue the SKB for transmission on the parent interface, but
>          * do not modify its EtherType
>          */
> -       skb->protocol = htons(ETH_P_BRCMTAG);
>         skb->dev = p->parent->dst->master_netdev;
>         dev_queue_xmit(skb);
> 
> making me think it is not actually needed to change
> skb->protocol. When i remove this from edsa_xmit(), the warning goes
> away and networking seems to work O.K.
> 
> Is this the right fix? Should we remove this setting of skb->protocol
> in the other dsa xmit functions?

Adding Lennert here, I suspect that having the skb->protocol assignment
was initially done to help drivers such as mv643xx_eth and others doing
DSA to be able to identify these packets properly in the transmit path.

Unless there is something else, I would be inclined to remove the
skb->protocol assignment from tag_dsa.c and tag_edsa.c. In case the
driver needs to consult what is configured, it should either:

- look at dev->dsa_ptr->tag_protocol if we do not need to know on a
per-packet basis what's the tagging protocol used (using
netdev_uses_dsa() + a helper function we'd introduce)

- or, if we we need that information to be per-packet, have a
DSA-specific control block and a set of helpers to retrieve that information
--
Florian
--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists