netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] tc: fix tc actions in case of shared skb

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: <55A4FE56.90605@iogearbox.net>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:19:34 +0200
From:	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, jiri@...nulli.us,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tc: fix tc actions in case of shared skb

On 07/14/2015 01:57 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On 07/14/15 06:29, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 07/14/2015 12:26 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>> On 7/13/15 1:55 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>>> On 07/13/2015 10:17 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> We cannot check tc actions from pktgen, since they can be added
>>>>> dynamically.
>>>>> So I see three options:
>>>>> 1 get rid of burst hack for both RX and TX in pktgen (kills
>>>>> performance)
>>>>> 2 add unlikely(skb_shread) check to few tc actions
>>>>> 3 do nothing
>>> ...
>>>> pktgen case. :/ With regards to option 2, you could hide that behind
>>>> a static inline helper wrapped in IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NET_PKTGEN), but
>>>> that is a veeeery ugly workaround/hack as well (and distros might
>>>> even ship it nevertheless).
>>>
>>> naming such helper is a headache as well.
>>> static inline bool is_pktgen_shared_skb(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>> {
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NET_PKTGEN)
>>>      /* pktgen uses skb->users += burst trick to reuse skb */
>>>      return skb_shared(skb);
>>> #else
>>>      return false;
>>> #endif
>>> }
>>> and in actions:
>>> if (unlikely(is_pktgen_shared_skb(skb))) goto drop;
>>>
>>> thoughts?
>>
>> As I mentioned above, so Fedora, for example, ships pktgen by default.
>> That means, we'd run into the above test for shared skb in every case,
>> meaning it won't help much and it's also a pretty nasty hack. ;)
>>
>> One other thing that comes to mind, not sure if it's worth it though,
>> would be to split the skb->tc_verd's TC_NCLS itself into TC_NCLS/TC_NACT,
>> so that you can go into the classifier, but skip the action part.
>>
>> Since in tcf_action_exec(), we already test for that, you might be able
>> to add this with no extra cost. pktgen would then need to tag its skb
>> with TC_NACT, so that you'll always return with TC_ACT_OK. And if you
>> really would want to test tc actions, then w/o pktgen bursting ...
>
> Would just a simple skb->mark not work? Drop if skb->mark = x
> using skbedit. Or a brand new pktgen_burst_mode action that drops?

I think it's more about the fact that something could BUG() when used with
pktgen, otherwise you could just generally drop after classification.
--
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