netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 05/15] ipv6/gso: remove temporary HBH/jumbo header

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:   Thu, 3 Feb 2022 16:27:42 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Coco Li <lixiaoyan@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 05/15] ipv6/gso: remove temporary HBH/jumbo header

On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 4:05 PM Alexander Duyck
<alexander.duyck@...il.com> wrote:
>

> I get that. What I was getting at was that we might be able to process
> it in ipv6_gso_segment before we hand it off to either TCP or UDP gso
> handlers to segment.
>
> The general idea being we keep the IPv6 specific bits in the IPv6
> specific code instead of having the skb_segment function now have to
> understand IPv6 packets. So what we would end up doing is having to do
> an skb_cow to replace the skb->head if any clones might be holding on
> it, and then just chop off the HBH jumbo header before we start the
> segmenting.
>
> The risk would be that we waste cycles removing the HBH header for a
> frame that is going to fail, but I am not sure how likely a scenario
> that is or if we need to optimize for that.

I guess I can try this for the next version, thanks.