netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls

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: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 08:09:42 +0200
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
 Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device TX flow

On 6/20/23 19:12, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> 2023-06-20, 12:28:54 +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> tls_push_data() MSG_MORE / MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST, but bails
>> out on MSG_EOR.
>> But seeing that MSG_EOR is basically the opposite of
>> MSG_MORE / MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST this patch adds handling
>> MSG_EOR by treating it as the absence of MSG_MORE.
>> Consequently we should return an error when both are set.
>>
>> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
>> ---
>>   net/tls/tls_device.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/tls/tls_device.c b/net/tls/tls_device.c
>> index b82770f68807..ebefd148ecf5 100644
>> --- a/net/tls/tls_device.c
>> +++ b/net/tls/tls_device.c
>> @@ -440,11 +440,6 @@ static int tls_push_data(struct sock *sk,
>>   	int copy, rc = 0;
>>   	long timeo;
>>   
>> -	if (flags &
>> -	    ~(MSG_MORE | MSG_DONTWAIT | MSG_NOSIGNAL | MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST |
>> -	      MSG_SPLICE_PAGES))
>> -		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> -
>>   	if (unlikely(sk->sk_err))
>>   		return -sk->sk_err;
>>   
>> @@ -536,6 +531,10 @@ static int tls_push_data(struct sock *sk,
>>   				more = true;
>>   				break;
>>   			}
>> +			if (flags & MSG_EOR) {
>> +				more = false;
>> +				break;
> 
> Why the break here? We don't want to close and push the record in that
> case? (the "if (done || ...)" block just below)
> 
Ah, yes, you are correct. Will be fixing it.

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                Kernel Storage Architect
hare@...e.de                              +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew
Myers, Andrew McDonald, Martje Boudien Moerman