netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Marks <pmarks@google.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, lorenzo@google.com,
	Paul Marks <pmarks@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH] ipv6: Fix preferred_lft not updating in some cases
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:12:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1380147175-14874-1-git-send-email-pmarks@google.com> (raw)

Consider the scenario where an IPv6 router is advertising a fixed
preferred_lft of 1800 seconds, while the valid_lft begins at 3600
seconds and counts down in realtime.

A client should reset its preferred_lft to 1800 every time the RA is
received, but a bug is causing Linux to ignore the update.

The core problem is here:
  if (prefered_lft != ifp->prefered_lft) {

Note that ifp->prefered_lft is an offset, so it doesn't decrease over
time.  Thus, the comparison is always (1800 != 1800), which fails to
trigger an update.

The most direct solution would be to compute a "stored_prefered_lft",
and use that value in the comparison.  But I think that trying to filter
out unnecessary updates here is a premature optimization.  In order for
the filter to apply, both of these would need to hold:

  - The advertised valid_lft and preferred_lft are both declining in
    real time.
  - No clock skew exists between the router & client.

So in this patch, I've set "update_lft = 1" unconditionally, which
allows the surrounding code to be greatly simplified.

Signed-off-by: Paul Marks <pmarks@google.com>
---
 net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 52 +++++++++++++++-------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
index d6ff126..9a5052c 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
@@ -2193,43 +2193,21 @@ ok:
 			else
 				stored_lft = 0;
 			if (!update_lft && !create && stored_lft) {
-				if (valid_lft > MIN_VALID_LIFETIME ||
-				    valid_lft > stored_lft)
-					update_lft = 1;
-				else if (stored_lft <= MIN_VALID_LIFETIME) {
-					/* valid_lft <= stored_lft is always true */
-					/*
-					 * RFC 4862 Section 5.5.3e:
-					 * "Note that the preferred lifetime of
-					 *  the corresponding address is always
-					 *  reset to the Preferred Lifetime in
-					 *  the received Prefix Information
-					 *  option, regardless of whether the
-					 *  valid lifetime is also reset or
-					 *  ignored."
-					 *
-					 *  So if the preferred lifetime in
-					 *  this advertisement is different
-					 *  than what we have stored, but the
-					 *  valid lifetime is invalid, just
-					 *  reset prefered_lft.
-					 *
-					 *  We must set the valid lifetime
-					 *  to the stored lifetime since we'll
-					 *  be updating the timestamp below,
-					 *  else we'll set it back to the
-					 *  minimum.
-					 */
-					if (prefered_lft != ifp->prefered_lft) {
-						valid_lft = stored_lft;
-						update_lft = 1;
-					}
-				} else {
-					valid_lft = MIN_VALID_LIFETIME;
-					if (valid_lft < prefered_lft)
-						prefered_lft = valid_lft;
-					update_lft = 1;
-				}
+				const u32 minimum_lft = min(
+					stored_lft, (u32)MIN_VALID_LIFETIME);
+				valid_lft = max(valid_lft, minimum_lft);
+
+				/* RFC4862 Section 5.5.3e:
+				 * "Note that the preferred lifetime of the
+				 *  corresponding address is always reset to
+				 *  the Preferred Lifetime in the received
+				 *  Prefix Information option, regardless of
+				 *  whether the valid lifetime is also reset or
+				 *  ignored."
+				 *
+				 * So we should always update prefered_lft here.
+				 */
+				update_lft = 1;
 			}
 
 			if (update_lft) {
-- 
1.8.4

             reply	other threads:[~2013-09-25 22:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-25 22:12 Paul Marks [this message]
2013-09-27  8:16 ` [PATCH] ipv6: Fix preferred_lft not updating in some cases Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-09-27 20:28   ` Paul Marks
2013-09-28 20:28     ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2013-09-30 19:06       ` David Miller

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=1380147175-14874-1-git-send-email-pmarks@google.com \
    --to=pmarks@google.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=lorenzo@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).