netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Andrian Nord <nightnord-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	lxc-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
	Eric Dumazet
	<eric.dumazet-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Linux Netdev List
	<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: Bad checksums and lost packets with macvlan on dummy
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:59:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D7BECCD.70004@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D764030.8020202-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>


Hi Patrick,

I noticed another problem with the macvlan driver.

In the function dev_forward_skb the test always succeed in the second 
condition making the packet to be dropped.

...

     if (unlikely(!(dev->flags & IFF_UP) ||
              (skb->len > (dev->mtu + dev->hard_header_len + VLAN_HLEN)))) {

...

When tracing I have the following values:

skb->len = 2962
and
dev->mtu + dev->hard_header_len + VLAN_HLEN = 1518

Do you have any idea where that could be come from ?

Thanks

   -- Daniel



On 03/08/2011 03:41 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Am 02.03.2011 19:33, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 03/02/2011 07:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> Am 02.03.2011 17:03, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>> On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>>> Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>>>>> On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>>>>>> Patrick, do you have any suggestions to fix this ?
>>>>>>> Since the frames are only looped back locally, I suppose the easiest
>>>>>>> fix would be to mark them with CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY. Alternatively
>>>>>>> we need to complete the checksum manually, similar to what
>>>>>>> dev_hard_start_xmit() does.
>>>>>> That sounds very simple to fix, maybe too much simple :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did the following change:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --- linux-next.orig/drivers/net/macvlan.c
>>>>>> +++ linux-next/drivers/net/macvlan.c
>>>>>> @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ static int macvlan_queue_xmit(struct sk_
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            if (vlan->mode == MACVLAN_MODE_BRIDGE) {
>>>>>>                    const struct ethhdr *eth = (void *)skb->data;
>>>>>> +               skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                    /* send to other bridge ports directly */
>>>>>>                    if (is_multicast_ether_addr(eth->h_dest)) {
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and that fixed the problem. Do you think it is acceptable ?
>>>>> The only problem I see is if the packets are bridged to a
>>>>> different networking device (or redirected using the mirred
>>>>> action), in this case the checksum will not be completed.
>>>>> This would be a very strange setup though and probably wouldn't
>>>>> be using dummy as lower device, so I'm not sure we have to
>>>>> worry about this case.
>>>> I am not sure to get it, do you say the patch is correct ?
>>> Its correct with a short-coming that doesn't seem to matter.
>>>
>>>> If my understanding is correct, the packet will be flagged
>>>> CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY only for the macvlan devices, right ?
>>> Only for packets bridged between macvlan devices. A setup like
>>> the following would cause problems:
>>>
>>>                           br0
>>>                            |
>>>                      .----------.
>>>                      |          |
>>> macvlan0    macvlan1    eth0
>>>      |               |
>>>       -------.-------
>>>       dummy0
>>>
>>> In this case packets sent from macvlan0 will show up on
>>> eth0 with incorrect setups. However this setup doesn't
>>> seem realistic to me, you would simply use eth0 instead
>>> of dummy0.
>> Ok, I understand. thanks for the clarification.
>>
>>>> By the way, this problem occurs for any lower device with offloading
>>>> capabilities with a macvlan port in bridge mode.
>>> True. This doesn't affect outgoing packets since their checksum
>>> will be completed in dev_hard_start_xmit(), but it affects
>>> packets bridged between macvlans.
>> One last question. In the case of broadcast packets with maclvan in
>> bridge mode.
>> We will have the packets going through each macvlan port and also to the
>> lower-device, right ?
>> For the latter, don't we have a problem if the packet is flagged
>> CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY ?
>>
>> Shouldn't we restore the ip_summed field before sending through
>> dev_queue_xmit ?
> Yes, that seems correct in order to have dev_hard_start_xmit() complete
> the checksum if necessary.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-03-12 21:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20110221150710.GA5651@nord.niifaq.ru>
     [not found] ` <4D6282DB.2080204@free.fr>
     [not found]   ` <20110221153421.GA6602@nord.niifaq.ru>
2011-02-21 16:07     ` [Lxc-users] Huge ammount of invalid checksum packets on macvlan Daniel Lezcano
     [not found]       ` <4D628DC3.9000400-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
2011-02-21 17:39         ` Andrian Nord
2011-02-23 17:13       ` [Lxc-users] Bad checksums and lost packets with macvlan on dummy Andrian Nord
2011-02-24 10:20         ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-26 20:38           ` Andrian Nord
2011-02-27 15:14         ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-27 19:50           ` Eric Dumazet
2011-02-27 20:35             ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-02-28  7:45               ` [Lxc-users] " Eric Dumazet
2011-03-01 13:29                 ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-03-01 16:51                   ` Patrick McHardy
2011-03-01 20:04                     ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-03-02 11:03                       ` Patrick McHardy
2011-03-02 16:03                         ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-03-02 18:03                           ` Patrick McHardy
2011-03-02 18:33                             ` Daniel Lezcano
2011-03-03 14:30                               ` Changli Gao
2011-03-08 14:41                               ` Patrick McHardy
     [not found]                                 ` <4D764030.8020202-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
2011-03-12 21:59                                   ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2011-03-12 22:07                                     ` Daniel Lezcano

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=4D7BECCD.70004@free.fr \
    --to=daniel.lezcano-ganu6spqydw@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=eric.dumazet-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=kaber-dcUjhNyLwpNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=lxc-users-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=nightnord-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.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).