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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:48:02 -0800
From:   Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To:     Weqaar Janjua <weqaar.janjua@...il.com>
CC:     Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
        <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, <ast@...nel.org>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>,
        Weqaar Janjua <weqaar.a.janjua@...el.com>, <shuah@...nel.org>,
        <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>,
        <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/5] selftests/bpf: xsk selftests framework



On 12/7/20 1:55 PM, Weqaar Janjua wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 03:13, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/27/20 9:54 AM, Weqaar Janjua wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 at 04:19, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/26/20 1:22 PM, Weqaar Janjua wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 09:01, Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2020-11-26 07:44, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What other configures I am missing?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, I cherry-picked the following pick from bpf tree in this experiment.
>>>>>>>       commit e7f4a5919bf66e530e08ff352d9b78ed89574e6b (HEAD -> xsk)
>>>>>>>       Author: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
>>>>>>>       Date:   Mon Nov 23 18:56:00 2020 +0100
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>           net, xsk: Avoid taking multiple skbuff references
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, I'm getting an oops, unless I cherry-pick:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 36ccdf85829a ("net, xsk: Avoid taking multiple skbuff references")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *AND*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 537cf4e3cc2f ("xsk: Fix umem cleanup bug at socket destruct")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> from bpf/master.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Same as Bjorn's findings ^^^, additionally applying the second patch
>>>>> 537cf4e3cc2f [PASS] all tests for me
>>>>>
>>>>> PREREQUISITES: [ PASS ]
>>>>> SKB NOPOLL: [ PASS ]
>>>>> SKB POLL: [ PASS ]
>>>>> DRV NOPOLL: [ PASS ]
>>>>> DRV POLL: [ PASS ]
>>>>> SKB SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ PASS ]
>>>>> DRV SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ PASS ]
>>>>> SKB BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ PASS ]
>>>>> DRV BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ PASS ]
>>>>>
>>>>> With the first patch alone, as soon as we enter DRV/Native NOPOLL mode
>>>>> kernel panics, whereas in your case NOPOLL tests were falling with
>>>>> packets being *lost* as per seqnum mismatch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please test this out with both patches and let us know?
>>>>
>>>> I applied both the above patches in bpf-next as well as this patch set,
>>>> I still see failures. I am attaching my config file. Maybe you can take
>>>> a look at what is the issue.
>>>>
>>> Thanks for the config, can you please confirm the compiler version,
>>> and resource limits i.e. stack size, memory, etc.?
>>
>> root@...h-fb-vm1:~/net-next/net-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf ulimit -a
>> core file size          (blocks, -c) unlimited
>> data seg size           (kbytes, -d) unlimited
>> scheduling priority             (-e) 0
>> file size               (blocks, -f) unlimited
>> pending signals                 (-i) 15587
>> max locked memory       (kbytes, -l) unlimited
>> max memory size         (kbytes, -m) unlimited
>> open files                      (-n) 1024
>> pipe size            (512 bytes, -p) 8
>> POSIX message queues     (bytes, -q) 819200
>> real-time priority              (-r) 0
>> stack size              (kbytes, -s) 8192
>> cpu time               (seconds, -t) unlimited
>> max user processes              (-u) 15587
>> virtual memory          (kbytes, -v) unlimited
>> file locks                      (-x) unlimited
>>
>> compiler: gcc 8.2
>>
>>>
>>> Only NOPOLL tests are failing for you as I see it, do the same tests
>>> fail every time?
>>
>> In my case, with above two bpf patches applied as well, I got:
>> $ ./test_xsk.sh
>> setting up ve9127: root: 192.168.222.1/30
>>
>> setting up ve4520: af_xdp4520: 192.168.222.2/30
>>
>> Spec file created: veth.spec
>>
>> PREREQUISITES: [ PASS ]
>>
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>>
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>>
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>>
>> 1..1
>>
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>>
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>>
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>>
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [59], payloadseqnum [0]
>>
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>>
>> SKB NOPOLL: [ FAIL ]
>>
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>>
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>>
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>>
>> 1..1
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> # End-of-tranmission frame received: PASS
>> # Received 10000 packets on interface ve4520
>> ok 1 PASS: SKB POLL
>> # Totals: pass:1 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB POLL: [ PASS ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [153], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV NOPOLL: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> # End-of-tranmission frame received: PASS
>> # Received 10000 packets on interface ve4520
>> ok 1 PASS: DRV POLL
>> # Totals: pass:1 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV POLL: [ PASS ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [54], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [0], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [64], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve9127
>> # Interface found: ve4520
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4520
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4520] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve9127] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve9127
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [83], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ FAIL ]
>> cleaning up...
>> removing link ve4520
>> removing ns af_xdp4520
>> removing spec file: veth.spec
>>
>> Second runs have one previous success becoming failure.
>>
>> ./test_xsk.sh
>> setting up ve2458: root: 192.168.222.1/30
>>
>> setting up ve4468: af_xdp4468: 192.168.222.2/30
>>
>> [  286.597111] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): ve4468: link becomes ready
>>
>> Spec file created: veth.spec
>>
>> PREREQUISITES: [ PASS ]
>>
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>>
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>>
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>>
>> 1..1
>>
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>>
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>>
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>>
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [67], payloadseqnum [0]
>>
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>>
>> SKB NOPOLL: [ FAIL ]
>>
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>>
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>>
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>>
>> 1..1
>>
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>>
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>>
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>>
>> # End-of-tranmission frame received: PASS
>> # Received 10000 packets on interface ve4468
>> ok 1 PASS: SKB POLL
>> # Totals: pass:1 fail:0 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB POLL: [ PASS ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [191], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV NOPOLL: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [0], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV POLL: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [0], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [171], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV SOCKET TEARDOWN: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [124], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> SKB BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ FAIL ]
>> # Interface found: ve2458
>> # Interface found: ve4468
>> # NS switched: af_xdp4468
>> 1..1
>> # Creating socket
>> # Interface [ve4468] vector [Rx]
>> # Interface [ve2458] vector [Tx]
>> # Sending 10000 packets on interface ve2458
>> not ok 1 ERROR: [worker_pkt_validate] prev_pkt [195], payloadseqnum [0]
>> # Totals: pass:0 fail:1 xfail:0 xpass:0 skip:0 error:0
>> DRV BIDIRECTIONAL SOCKETS: [ FAIL ]
>> cleaning up...
>> removing link ve4468
>> removing ns af_xdp4468
>> removing spec file: veth.spec
>>
>>>
>>> I will need to spend some time debugging this to have a fix.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> /Weqaar
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Can I just run test_xsk.sh at tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ directory?
>>>>>> This will be easier than the above for bpf developers. If it does not
>>>>>> work, I would like to recommend to make it work.
>>>>>>
>>>>> yes test_xsk.shis self contained, will update the instructions in there with v4.
>>>>
>>>> That will be great. Thanks!
>>>>
> v4 is out on the list, incorporating most if not all your suggestions
> to the best of my memory.
> 
> I was able to reproduce the issue you were seeing (from your logs) ->
> veth interfaces were receiving packets from the IPv6 neighboring
> system (thanks @Björn Töpel for mentioning this).
> 
> The packet validation algo in *xdpxceiver* *assumed* all packets would
> be IPv4 and intended for Rx.
> Rx validates packets on both ip->tos = 0x9 (id for xsk tests) and
> ip->version = 0x4, ignores the rest.
> 
> Hoping the tests now work -> PASS in your environment.

Yes, no all tests passed in my environment. I will reply the v4
with Test-by tag. Now I think xsk people can really look at details.

> 
> Thanks,
> /Weqaar
> 
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> /Weqaar
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Björn

Powered by blists - more mailing lists