From: Sebastian Poehn <sebastian.poehn@gmail.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, sebastian.poehn@gmail.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [FYI] xfrm: Don't lookup sk_policy for timewait sockets
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 13:14:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1428664454.10242.19.camel@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150409212144.GH20653@breakpoint.cc>
On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 23:21 +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
> David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> > From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
> > Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 21:14:41 +0200
> >
> > > I re-introduced this in fd158d79d33d3c under the assumption
> > > that the input path handles skb->sk timewait sockets correctly
> > > after all the early demux changes, afaics tcp edemux can also
> > > assign skb->sk timewait sockets.
> > >
> > > Also, reporter mentions 3.8 as affected which should not assign
> > > tw sockets to skb->sk.
> > >
> > > Even more strange, the reporters backtrace seems to indicate
> > > crash at end of forward path.
> > >
> > > Sebastian, can you disable tw assignment via TPROXY in 3.12 just
> > > to see if it makes a difference?
> > >
> > > [ not doing the assignment is safe provided you still set tproxy mark
> > > on the skb; policy routing will ensure local delivery ].
> >
> > My assumption in my analysis is that TPROXY writes the socket to
> > skb->sk, and it is also being forwarded. And yes this is based
> > upon his backtrace.
>
> Right. However, I think we might have to make more changes than just tproxy.
>
> If we have sockets bound to non-local addresses then why would tcp edemux
> not cause same issue?
Thanks for all the helpful inputs. I will try to provide some more information
and try a bit around with TPROXY not assigning tw sockets.
I will provide you with an update the next days.
Unfortunately this is a very rare event and (yet) impossible to reproduce in-house.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-10 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-09 8:09 [FYI] xfrm: Don't lookup sk_policy for timewait sockets Sebastian Poehn
2015-04-09 9:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-09 9:24 ` Sebastian Poehn
2015-04-09 18:37 ` David Miller
2015-04-09 19:14 ` Florian Westphal
2015-04-09 21:07 ` David Miller
2015-04-09 21:21 ` Florian Westphal
2015-04-10 11:14 ` Sebastian Poehn [this message]
2015-04-13 8:04 ` Sebastian Poehn
2015-04-13 15:09 ` Sebastian Poehn
2015-04-13 15:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-13 17:25 ` David Miller
2015-04-13 16:04 ` Florian Westphal
2015-04-09 19:21 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-09 19:25 ` Florian Westphal
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=1428664454.10242.19.camel@googlemail.com \
--to=sebastian.poehn@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=netdev@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 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).