[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALx6S360w+Y2BVj7Fv0dzmeivD2oO6NWaevMZyNB1kh7RrOgqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 12:55:34 -0700
From: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
To: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] skbuff: Fix skb checksum flag on skb pull
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com> wrote:
>>>>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
>>>>> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
>>>>> can cause the panic when checksum is calculated on skb. Following patch
>>>>> fixes the bug by setting checksum unnecessary while pulling outer header.
>>>>>
>>>> Okay, I think I understand what you are doing. I suggest in the
>>>> openvswitch path, if there is a checksum CHECKSUM_PARTIAL that refers
>>>> to the outer headers which must have been verified at this point then
>>>> set to CHECKSUM_NONE-- assuming CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY on the inner
>>>> header is not correct in this case. If the CHECKSUM_PARTIAL refers to
>>>> the inner header then you can call skb_checksum_help to resolve an
>>>> inner checksum.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would be OVS specific fix, But I do see skb_checksum_help()
>>> called in multiple places outside OVS that could result in similar
>>> kernel panic. Therefore I want to solve it up in networking stack
>>> rather than in OVS.
>>>
>> Please try to reproduce this out of OVS from the top of the tree then
>> and report down exactly where panic is occurring the code. Unlike most
>> of the of the other cases where skb_checksum_help() is being called
>> this in the RX path so skb is probably not pulled over the checksum
>> offset for those. Even so, if the skb is pulled beyond the checksum
>> offset then this should result in a negative offset in
>> skb_checksum_start_offset(skb) which should be okay. It looks like
>> this in itself should not be causing your panic.
>>
>
> ip_do_fragment() also calls skb_checksum_help() that can results in
> similar panic. But it is not easy to reproduce it in this case due to
> call site is in exception path.
> The negative checksum offset can atleast cause assert failure in
> skb_checksum_help(). I will send patch to fix that.
Which BUG_ON do you see is hitting?
--
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