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: <66cc82229bea2_261e53294fd@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 09:24:50 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>, 
 davem@...emloft.net, 
 edumazet@...gle.com, 
 kuba@...nel.org, 
 pabeni@...hat.com, 
 dsahern@...nel.org, 
 willemb@...gle.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
 Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] tcp: make SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE
 feature per socket

Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> 
> Normally, if we want to record and print the rx timestamp after
> tcp_recvmsg_locked(), we must enable both SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE
> and SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE flags, from which we also can notice
> through running rxtimestamp binary in selftests (see testcase 7).
> 
> However, there is one particular case that fails the selftests with
> "./rxtimestamp: Expected swtstamp to not be set." error printing in
> testcase 6.
> 
> How does it happen? When we keep running a thread starting a socket
> and set SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE option first, then running
> ./rxtimestamp, it will fail. The reason is the former thread
> switching on netstamp_needed_key that makes the feature global,
> every skb going through netif_receive_skb_list_internal() function
> will get a current timestamp in net_timestamp_check(). So the skb
> will have timestamp regardless of whether its socket option has
> SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE or not.
> 
> After this patch, we can pass the selftest and control each socket
> as we want when using rx timestamp feature.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
> ---
>  net/ipv4/tcp.c | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> index 8514257f4ecd..49e73d66c57d 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> @@ -2235,6 +2235,7 @@ void tcp_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, const struct sock *sk,
>  			struct scm_timestamping_internal *tss)
>  {
>  	int new_tstamp = sock_flag(sk, SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW);
> +	u32 tsflags = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_tsflags);
>  	bool has_timestamping = false;
>  
>  	if (tss->ts[0].tv_sec || tss->ts[0].tv_nsec) {
> @@ -2274,14 +2275,19 @@ void tcp_recv_timestamp(struct msghdr *msg, const struct sock *sk,
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> -		if (READ_ONCE(sk->sk_tsflags) & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE)
> +		/* skb may contain timestamp because another socket
> +		 * turned on netstamp_needed_key which allows generate
> +		 * the timestamp. So we need to check the current socket.
> +		 */
> +		if (tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE &&
> +		    tsflags & SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE)
>  			has_timestamping = true;
>  		else
>  			tss->ts[0] = (struct timespec64) {0};
>  	}

The current behavior is as described in
Documentation/networking/timestamping.rst:

"The socket option configures timestamp generation for individual
sk_buffs (1.3.1), timestamp reporting to the socket's error
queue (1.3.2)"

SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE is a timestamp generation option.
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE is a timestamp reporting option.

This patch changes that clearly defined behavior.

On Tx the separation between generation and reporting has value, as it
allows setting the generation on a per packet basis with SCM_TSTAMP_*.

On Rx it is more subtle, but the two are still tested at different
points in the path, and can be updated by setsockopt in between a
packet arrival and a recvmsg().

The interaction between sockets on software timestamping is a
longstanding issue. I don't think there is any urgency to change this
now. This proposed change makes the API less consistent, and may
also affect applications that depend on the current behavior.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ