[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <171898.1667491439@vermin>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 17:03:59 +0100
From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Liang Li <liali@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bonding: fix ICMPv6 header handling when receiving IPv6 messages
Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com> wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 09:39:22PM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
>> > I don't understand this explanation, as ipv6_gro_receive() isn't
>> > called directly by the device drivers, but from within the GRO
>> > processing, e.g., by dev_gro_receive().
>> >
>> > Could you explain how the call paths actually differ?
>>
>> Er..Yes, it's a little weird.
>>
>> I checked if the transport header is set before __netif_receive_skb_core().
>> The bnx2x driver set it while be2net does not. So the transport header is reset
>> in __netif_receive_skb_core() with be2net.
>>
>> I also found ipv6_gro_receive() is called before bond_handle_frame() when
>> receive NA message. Not sure which path it go through. I'm not very familiar
>> with driver part. But I can do more investigating.
I suspect that what you're seeing is caused by bnx2x calling
skb_set_transport_header() in bnx2x_gro_ipv6_csum() to explicitly set
the transport header for IPv6, and benet having no equivalent call. If
benet were to set the transport header, I think it would happen in
be_rx_compl_process_gro().
__netif_receive_skb_core() calls skb_reset_transport_header() if
the transport header isn't set, but I presume that doesn't do the right
thing for ICMPv6.
I don't believe there's any expectation that drivers must set
the transport header at this point, so I tentatively think that what
your patch is trying to do is reasonable.
Briefly looking at the patch, the commit message needs updating,
and I'm curious to know why pskb_may_pull can't be used.
-J
>With dump_stack(), it shows bnx2x do calls ipv6_gro_receive().
>PS: I only dump the stack when receive NA.
>
>[ 65.537605] dump_stack_lvl+0x34/0x48
>[ 65.541695] ipv6_gro_receive.cold+0x1b/0x3d
>[ 65.546453] dev_gro_receive+0x16c/0x380
>[ 65.550831] napi_gro_receive+0x64/0x210
>[ 65.555206] bnx2x_rx_int+0x44c/0x820 [bnx2x]
>[ 65.560100] bnx2x_poll+0xe5/0x1d0 [bnx2x]
>[ 65.564687] __napi_poll+0x2c/0x160
>[ 65.568579] net_rx_action+0x296/0x350
>
>Thanks
>Hangbin
---
-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists