netdev - Re: [next] bonding: pass link-local packets to bonding master also.

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, 19 Dec 2018 23:57:13 +0100
From:   Michal Soltys <soltys@....info>
To:     Vincent Bernat <vincent@...nat.ch>,
        Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@...dewar.net>
Cc:     Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>,
        Chonggang Li <chonggangli@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [next] bonding: pass link-local packets to bonding master also.

On 18/11/30 22:32, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>  ❦ 15 juillet 2018 19:12 -0700, Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@...dewar.net>:
> 
>> Commit b89f04c61efe ("bonding: deliver link-local packets with
>> skb->dev set to link that packets arrived on") changed the behavior
>> of how link-local-multicast packets are processed. The change in
>> the behavior broke some legacy use cases where these packets are
>> expected to arrive on bonding master device also.
> 
> Unfortunately, this doesn't completely restore the previous
> functionality as PACKET_ORIGDEV is broken for the copy: the original
> interface is lost through the call to netif_rx(). A LLDP daemon
> listening to the master interface won't get the original interface like
> it was able to before 4.12.
> 
> I am a bit lost of what the original patch was trying to achieve. I am
> using the following test program:
> 

Basing on what you wrote below, it seems that everything was already
possible before the Chonggang Li's commit ?

If I understand correctly:

- if listening on master, you could get both slave interface
(PACKET_ORIGDEV) as well as bonding master
- if listening on slave, you would just get the slave interface

Right ?

> <snip>
> #!/usr/bin/env python3
> 
> import sys
> import socket
> import datetime
> 
> socket.SOL_PACKET = 263
> socket.ETH_P_ALL = 3
> socket.PACKET_ORIGDEV = 9
> 
> interface = sys.argv[1] if len(sys.argv) > 1 else 'lag1'
> 
> s = socket.socket(socket.AF_PACKET,
>                   socket.SOCK_RAW,
>                   socket.htons(socket.ETH_P_ALL))
> s.bind((interface, 0))
> s.setsockopt(socket.SOL_PACKET, socket.PACKET_ORIGDEV, 1)
> while True:
>     data, addrinfo = s.recvfrom(1500)
>     if addrinfo[2] == socket.PACKET_OUTGOING:
>         continue
>     print(f"{datetime.datetime.now().isoformat()}: "
>           f"Received {len(data)} bytes from {addrinfo}")
> #v-
> 
> If I run it with a kernel compiled with the commit before b89f04c61efe
> (plus a few more cherry-pick to make it work like ea8ffc0818d8 and
> 72ccc471e13b), I get:
> 
> #v+
> 2018-11-30T22:20:40.193378: Received 221 bytes from ('eth1', 35020, 2, 1, b'RT3\x00\x00\x02')
> 2018-11-30T22:20:40.194504: Received 221 bytes from ('eth0', 35020, 2, 1, b'RT3\x00\x00\x01')
> #v-
> 
> If I send non link-local packets, I get:
> 
> #v+
> 2018-11-30T22:25:57.300965: Received 98 bytes from ('eth0', 2048, 0, 1, b'PT3\x00\x00\x02')
> #v-
> 
> I am also able to correctly receive link-local packets directly on each
> interface. So, it seems everything was working as expected before
> b89f04c61efe.
>