From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
herbert@gondor.apana.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Do not include padding in TCP GRO checksum
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 22:00:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5285B860.1060800@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131115042057.GA24470@gondor.apana.org.au>
On 11/14/2013 08:20 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 05:18:18PM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> In some recent tests where I was generating invalid frames I found that
>> the checksum was being treated as valid for certain frames that computed
>> the checksum with padding included. On closer inspection I found the
>> issue was that GRO was using the skb->len instead of the length recorded in
>> the IP/IPv6 header to determine the number of bytes to checksum. As such
>> padded frames that actually had invalid checksums generated by adding the
>> padding to the checksum were being incorrectly tagged as valid.
>>
>> This change corrects that by using the tot_len from IPv4 headers and the
>> payload_len from IPv6 headers to compute the total number of bytes to be
>> included in the checksum.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
>
> Good catch.
I wouldn't have caught it except for I had introduced just the right
packet to see this when I was debugging some FPGA hardware.
>
>> + /* adjust for any offsets */
>> + length += skb_network_offset(skb) - skb_gro_offset(skb);
>
> Since skb->csum includes your padding, you'll need to adjust that
> as well. Also this is not the only place where we use skb_gro_len
> to measure the packet length. So rather than changing each one
> of them, I think we could just do a pskb_trim_rcsum at the point
> where we obtain the network packet length, i.e., in ipv4/ipv6.
I thought about doing it there, but it seemed like the preference was to
flush instead of trim. Both the inet_gro_receive call and the
ipv6_gro_receive perform a check for length, and if it differs they set
the flush bit.
> We should then fix pskb_trim_rcsum to adjust CHECKSUM_COMPLETE
> checksums as otherwise your NIC's RX checksum offload feature
> will be useless.
>
> Thanks,
If that is the case why aren't we doing this for ipv4 right now? I
think what I will do for now is just detect the case where we are padded
for CHECKSUM_COMPLETE and simply fall back to the CHECKSUM_NONE case.
Thanks,
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-15 5:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-15 1:18 [PATCH] net: Do not include padding in TCP GRO checksum Alexander Duyck
2013-11-15 1:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-11-15 4:08 ` David Miller
2013-11-15 5:34 ` Alexander Duyck
2013-11-15 4:20 ` Herbert Xu
2013-11-15 6:00 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2013-11-18 20:44 ` Ben Hutchings
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=5285B860.1060800@gmail.com \
--to=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--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).