[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSdgNT8LfySseSB2Yaw8xm5woB8cM_BFrr=LH01L-98T0g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:15:39 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@...me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/8] udp: fixup csum for GSO receive slow path
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 6:29 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> When UDP packets generated locally by a socket with UDP_SEGMENT
> traverse the following path:
>
> UDP tunnel(xmit) -> veth (segmentation) -> veth (gro) ->
> UDP tunnel (rx) -> UDP socket (no UDP_GRO)
>
> ip_summed will be set to CHECKSUM_PARTIAL at creation time and
> such checksum mode will be preserved in the above path up to the
> UDP tunnel receive code where we have:
>
> __iptunnel_pull_header() -> skb_pull_rcsum() ->
> skb_postpull_rcsum() -> __skb_postpull_rcsum()
>
> The latter will convert the skb to CHECKSUM_NONE.
>
> The UDP GSO packet will be later segmented as part of the rx socket
> receive operation, and will present a CHECKSUM_NONE after segmentation.
>
> Additionally the segmented packets UDP CB still refers to the original
> GSO packet len. Overall that causes unexpected/wrong csum validation
> errors later in the UDP receive path.
>
> We could possibly address the issue with some additional checks and
> csum mangling in the UDP tunnel code. Since the issue affects only
> this UDP receive slow path, let's set a suitable csum status there.
>
> Note that SKB_GSO_UDP_L4 or SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST packets lacking an UDP
> encapsulation present a valid checksum when landing to udp_queue_rcv_skb(),
> as the UDP checksum has been validated by the GRO engine.
>
> v2 -> v3:
> - even more verbose commit message and comments
>
> v1 -> v2:
> - restrict the csum update to the packets strictly needing them
> - hopefully clarify the commit message and code comments
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists