From: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf, test_run: fix &xdp_frame misplacement for LIVE_FRAMES
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 13:29:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d3a9feb-9ee5-4a49-330a-9a475e459228@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87v8ka7gh5.fsf@toke.dk>
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 21:04:38 +0100
> Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> writes:
>
>> &xdp_buff and &xdp_frame are bound in a way that
>>
>> xdp_buff->data_hard_start == xdp_frame
>>
>> It's always the case and e.g. xdp_convert_buff_to_frame() relies on
>> this.
>> IOW, the following:
>>
>> for (u32 i = 0; i < 0xdead; i++) {
>> xdpf = xdp_convert_buff_to_frame(&xdp);
>> xdp_convert_frame_to_buff(xdpf, &xdp);
>> }
>>
>> shouldn't ever modify @xdpf's contents or the pointer itself.
>> However, "live packet" code wrongly treats &xdp_frame as part of its
>> context placed *before* the data_hard_start. With such flow,
>> data_hard_start is sizeof(*xdpf) off to the right and no longer points
>> to the XDP frame.
>
> Oh, nice find!
>
>> Instead of replacing `sizeof(ctx)` with `offsetof(ctx, xdpf)` in several
>> places and praying that there are no more miscalcs left somewhere in the
>> code, unionize ::frm with ::data in a flex array, so that both starts
>> pointing to the actual data_hard_start and the XDP frame actually starts
>> being a part of it, i.e. a part of the headroom, not the context.
>> A nice side effect is that the maximum frame size for this mode gets
>> increased by 40 bytes, as xdp_buff::frame_sz includes everything from
>> data_hard_start (-> includes xdpf already) to the end of XDP/skb shared
>> info.
>
> I like the union approach, however...
>
>> (was found while testing XDP traffic generator on ice, which calls
>> xdp_convert_frame_to_buff() for each XDP frame)
>>
>> Fixes: b530e9e1063e ("bpf: Add "live packet" mode for XDP in BPF_PROG_RUN")
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>
>> ---
>> net/bpf/test_run.c | 13 ++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c
>> index 2723623429ac..c3cce7a8d47d 100644
>> --- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
>> +++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
>> @@ -97,8 +97,11 @@ static bool bpf_test_timer_continue(struct bpf_test_timer *t, int iterations,
>> struct xdp_page_head {
>> struct xdp_buff orig_ctx;
>> struct xdp_buff ctx;
>> - struct xdp_frame frm;
>> - u8 data[];
>> + union {
>> + /* ::data_hard_start starts here */
>> + DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(struct xdp_frame, frm);
>> + DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(u8, data);
>> + };
>
> ...why does the xdp_frame need to be a flex array? Shouldn't this just be:
>
> + union {
> + /* ::data_hard_start starts here */
> + struct xdp_frame frm;
> + DECLARE_FLEX_ARRAY(u8, data);
> + };
>
> which would also get rid of the other three hunks of the patch?
That was my first thought. However, as I mentioned in between the lines
in the commitmsg, this doesn't decrease the sizeof(ctx), so we'd have to
replace those sizeofs with offsetof() in a couple places (-> the patch
length would be the same). So I went this way to declare that frm
doesn't belong to ctx but to the headroom.
I'm fine either way tho, so up to you guys.
>
> -Toke
>
Thanks,
Olek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-10 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-09 17:28 [PATCH bpf] bpf, test_run: fix &xdp_frame misplacement for LIVE_FRAMES Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-09 20:04 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-09 20:58 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2023-02-10 12:31 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-10 13:19 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-09 20:04 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2023-02-10 12:29 ` Alexander Lobakin [this message]
2023-02-10 17:38 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2023-02-13 14:03 ` Alexander Lobakin
2023-02-11 2:01 ` Jakub Kicinski
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=8d3a9feb-9ee5-4a49-330a-9a475e459228@intel.com \
--to=alexandr.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox