Re: Virtual device and ARP table

[Christophe Jelger <Christophe.Jelger@unibas.ch>]

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le lundi 07 juin 2010 à 12:21 +0200, Christophe Jelger a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am currently "resurrecting" a Linux module (called LUNAR) which I 
>> co-developed in 2007 and I'm having a weird kernel crash. This code 
>> basically used to work fine up to 2.6.18 which was the latest version 
>> before we stopped our development. I quickly ported it to 2.6.{31,32}: 
>> it compiles fine and loads fine, but it crashes/hangs the kernel when 
>> it's really being used.
>>
>> The module is a virtual device used for MANET routing: with the current 
>> version, it basically "captures" DNS requests sent to the virtual 
>> interface --> this triggers the sending of a fake DNS reply (see below) 
>> and the creation of an ARP table entry for the destination (the MANET 
>> route is built at the same time). Packets can then be sent to the 
>> destination.
>>
>> The problem I'm having is that the kernel quickly hangs after I create a 
>> new ARP entry (actually only if it's being used). If the entry I create 
>> is set to NUD_PERMANENT, then everything works fine! I use 
>> __neigh_lookup_errno to lookup/create the entry and neigh_lookup to 
>> set/update the MAC address. Note that the ARP entry is created without 
>> problem, but typically even just doing a userspace "arp -a" command can 
>> crash the kernel (it also hangs the userspace command!). Doing "arp -na" 
>> usually does NOT crash the kernel!
>>
>> I guess the problem comes from a combination of ARP + DNS 
>> lookups/replies. Note that my kernel module has its own internal fake 
>> DNS server which captures lookups and sends replies directly back to the 
>> stack. What is amazing: if the ARP entry I create is set to 
>> NUD_PERMANENT, then I don't get any crash (however I cannot develop my 
>> module with permanent ARP entries).
>>
>> I'm wondering if there were any major changes to the neighbor and arp 
>> code (between 2.6.18 and 2.6.31) that are somehow causing this problem ?...
>>
>> Any hint is very welcome.
>>
>> thanks in advance,
>> Christophe
>>
>> PS: I can easily reproduce the problem, and was trying to debug with 
>> qemu and gdb server but so fra no success to clearly identify the 
>> problem. Last point: it seems the kernel does not really "crash" but 
>> rather ends up in some unstable state and maybe in a loop.
>> --
> 
> Hi Christophe
> 
> You should ask these kind of questions on netdev instead of lkml.
> 
> And of course, post your patch, or send us a crystal ball ;)
> 
> Yes, many things changed between 2.6.18 and 2.6.34
> 

Eric: thanks for the forward to the netdev list. Regarding the code, I 
of course welcome any help but didn't want to pollute the list with 
unsollicited code: I can of course of course send it directly to anyone 
who is willing to help (I can easily reproduce the problem on different 
machines).

Christophe