From: Bryan Duff <bduff@astrocorp.com>
To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: xt_statistic.c - the statistic match
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:20:59 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4967CDCB.3080306@astrocorp.com> (raw)
... gets out of sync in nth mode. The count seems to be off somehow.
At some point the count is off - in my case I have 3 rules that are
consecutive:
//snip - iptables rules
iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i ethX -s 10.10.10.0/24 -d
10.10.11.0/24 -m statistic --mode nth --every 3 --packet 0 -j MARK
--set-mark 1
iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i ethX -s 10.10.10.0/24 -d
10.10.11.0/24 -m statistic --mode nth --every 3 --packet 1 -j MARK
--set-mark 2 iptables -t mangle -A PREROUTING -i ethX -s 10.10.10.0/24
-d 10.10.11.0/24 -m statistic --mode nth --every 3 --packet 2 -j MARK
--set-mark 3
//end snip
Now when I accept those mark values, the packet counts which should be
almost equal are off by large numbers (hundreds of thousands):
//snip - iptables -L
978189 1210792980 ACCEPT all -- ethX *
10.10.10.0/24 10.10.11.0/24 MARK match 0x1
2182885 2704995300 ACCEPT all -- ethX *
10.10.10.0/24 10.10.11.0/24 MARK match 0x2
2289382 2862482240 ACCEPT all -- ethX *
10.10.10.0/24 10.10.11.0/24 MARK match 0x3
1417708 1807169776 MARK all -- ethX *
10.10.10.0/24 10.10.11.0/24 MARK set 0x1
1417708 1807169776 ACCEPT all -- ethX *
10.10.10.0/24 10.10.11.0/24 MARK match 0x1
//end snip
The mark target rule above should never see a packet.
//snip - printks show the goofiness (in this example packet 0, and
packet 2 are on the same count)
...
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 0: count 1 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 1: count 0 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 2: count 1 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 0: count 2 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 0 to 0
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 1: count 1 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 2: count 2 of every 2
Jan 9 22:35:32 localhost kernel: packet 2 to 0
...
//end snip
The last rule mark/accept should _never_ be hit (they should all be
accepted by then).
//snip (line 33 of xt_statistic.c - nth mode ...
switch (info->mode) {
case XT_STATISTIC_MODE_RANDOM:
if ((net_random() & 0x7FFFFFFF) <
info->u.random.probability)
ret = !ret;
break;
case XT_STATISTIC_MODE_NTH:
info = info->master;
spin_lock_bh(&nth_lock);
if (info->u.nth.count++ == info->u.nth.every) {
info->u.nth.count = 0;
ret = !ret;
}
spin_unlock_bh(&nth_lock);
break;
}
//end snip
Why would the nth mode case screw up? With 3 consecutive rules, I'll
have problems after perhaps 500,000 packets (but it varies wildly).
At some point of the 3 rules, 2 rules have the same packet count - so of
3 packets: one is double counted, and 1 is missed.
Random mode has no problems, but it doesn't do any locking and keeps no
state. Even when I change nth from a switch statement to a if/else, I
still have the same problem (I was thinking that maybe the compiler
didn't like spin locks in a case statement). I'm not sure if this is a
locking issue, how if it is, how to resolve (spin_lock_irq?).
This module is very simple, and I see similar usage of
spin_[un]lock_bh() all over the place. I hope I'm missing something.
Thanks.
-Bryan
next reply other threads:[~2009-01-09 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-09 22:20 Bryan Duff [this message]
2009-01-10 3:38 ` xt_statistic.c - the statistic match Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-12 17:35 ` Bryan Duff
2009-01-13 4:43 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-13 7:28 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-13 7:32 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-15 10:37 ` James King
2009-01-15 10:45 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-15 15:46 ` Bryan Duff
2009-01-15 15:56 ` Jan Engelhardt
2009-01-15 16:25 ` Bryan Duff
2009-01-15 15:34 ` Bryan Duff
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4967CDCB.3080306@astrocorp.com \
--to=bduff@astrocorp.com \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.