netdev - Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v2 4/6] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec full offload mode

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:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:50:07 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Raed Salem <raeds@...dia.com>,
        ipsec-devel <devel@...ux-ipsec.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v2 4/6] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec
 full offload mode

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 04:34:54PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 12:24:51PM +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 11:59:25AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > > > 
> > > > In IPsec full mode, the device is going to encrypt and encapsulate
> > > > packets that are associated with offloaded policy. After successful
> > > > policy lookup to indicate if packets should be offloaded or not,
> > > > the stack forwards packets to the device to do the magic.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Raed Salem <raeds@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Huy Nguyen <huyn@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> > > >  net/xfrm/xfrm_output.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> > > > index 1cc482e9c87d..db5ebd36f68c 100644
> > > > --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> > > > +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> > > 
> > > > @@ -366,6 +376,9 @@ bool xfrm_dev_offload_ok(struct sk_buff *skb, struct xfrm_state *x)
> > > >  	struct xfrm_dst *xdst = (struct xfrm_dst *)dst;
> > > >  	struct net_device *dev = x->xso.dev;
> > > >  
> > > > +	if (x->xso.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_FULL)
> > > > +		goto ok;
> > > 
> > > You skip the PMTU checks here. I've seen that you check
> > > the packet length against the device MTU in one of your
> > > mlx5 patches, but that does not help if the PMTU is below.
> > 
> > If device supports transformation of the packet, this packet
> > won't be counted as XFRM anymore. I'm not sure that we need
> > to perform XFRM specific checks.
> 
> This is not xfrm specific, it makes sure that the packet you
> want to send fits into the PMTU.

I will add.

Thanks