netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next v2 7/9] bpf: when doing BPF_PROG_TEST

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: <20190320165744.GI7431@mini-arch.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date:   Wed, 20 Mar 2019 09:57:44 -0700
From:   Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v2 7/9] bpf: when doing BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN for flow
 dissector use no-skb mode

On 03/19, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:21 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Now that we have __flow_bpf_dissect which works on raw data (by
> > constructing temporary on-stack skb), use it when doing
> > BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN for flow dissector.
> >
> > This should help us catch any possible bugs due to missing shinfo on
> > the per-cpu skb.
> >
> > Note that existing __skb_flow_bpf_dissect swallows L2 headers and returns
> > nhoff=0, we need to preserve the existing behavior.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  net/bpf/test_run.c | 48 ++++++++++++++--------------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> > @@ -300,9 +277,13 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_flow_dissector(struct bpf_prog *prog,
> >         preempt_disable();
> >         time_start = ktime_get_ns();
> >         for (i = 0; i < repeat; i++) {
> > -               retval = bpf_flow_dissect_skb(prog, skb,
> > -                                             &flow_keys_dissector,
> > -                                             &flow_keys);
> > +               retval = bpf_flow_dissect(prog, data, eth->h_proto, ETH_HLEN,
> > +                                         size, &flow_keys_dissector,
> > +                                         &flow_keys);
> > +               if (flow_keys.nhoff >= ETH_HLEN)
> > +                       flow_keys.nhoff -= ETH_HLEN;
> > +               if (flow_keys.thoff >= ETH_HLEN)
> > +                       flow_keys.thoff -= ETH_HLEN;
> 
> why are these conditional?
Hm, I didn't want these to be negative, because bpf flow program can set
them to zero and clamp_flow_keys makes sure they are in a "sensible"
range. For this particular case, I think we need to amend
clamp_flow_keys to make sure that flow_keys.nhoff is in the range of
initial_nhoff..hlen, not 0..hlen (and then we can drop these checks).