netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2] lib/libnetlink: ensure a minimum of 32KB for the buffer used in rtnl

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]

Message-ID: <7517ba8c-2f51-6ced-ba84-e349f5db8cac@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2023 15:29:51 +0300
From: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
 Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>, Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] lib/libnetlink: ensure a minimum of 32KB for the
 buffer used in rtnl_recvmsg()

On 13/02/2019 4:04, David Ahern wrote:
> On 2/12/19 6:58 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> In the past, we tried to increase the buffer size up to 32 KB in order
>> to reduce number of syscalls per dump.
>>
>> Commit 2d34851cd341 ("lib/libnetlink: re malloc buff if size is not enough")
>> brought the size back to 4KB because the kernel can not know the application
>> is ready to receive bigger requests.
>>
>> See kernel commits 9063e21fb026 ("netlink: autosize skb lengthes") and
>> d35c99ff77ec ("netlink: do not enter direct reclaim from netlink_dump()")
>> for more details.
>>
>> Fixes: 2d34851cd341 ("lib/libnetlink: re malloc buff if size is not enough")
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> Cc: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
>> Cc: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
>> ---
>>  lib/libnetlink.c | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/libnetlink.c b/lib/libnetlink.c
>> index 1892a02ab5d0d73776c9882ffc77edcd2c663d01..0d48a3d43cf03065dacbd419578ab10af56431a4 100644
>> --- a/lib/libnetlink.c
>> +++ b/lib/libnetlink.c
>> @@ -718,6 +718,8 @@ static int rtnl_recvmsg(int fd, struct msghdr *msg, char **answer)
>>  	if (len < 0)
>>  		return len;
>>  
>> +	if (len < 32768)
>> +		len = 32768;
>>  	buf = malloc(len);
>>  	if (!buf) {
>>  		fprintf(stderr, "malloc error: not enough buffer\n");
>>
> 
> I believe that negates the whole point of 2d34851cd341 - which I have no
> problem with. 2 recvmsg calls per message is overkill.
> 
> Do we know of any single message sizes > 32k? 2d34851cd341 cites
> increasing VF's but at some point there is a limit. If not, the whole
> PEEK thing should go away and we just malloc 32k (or 64k) buffers for
> each recvmsg.
> 

Hey,

Sorry for reviving this old thread, but I see this topic was already
discussed here :).
I have a system where the large number of VFs result in a message
greater than 32k, which makes a simple 'ip link' command return an error.

Should we change the kernel's 'max_recvmsg_len' to 64k? Any other (more
robust) ideas to resolve this issue?