From: Norbert van Bolhuis <nvbolhuis@aimvalley.nl>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
uaca@alumni.uv.es
Subject: Re: single process receives own frames due to PACKET_MMAP
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:16:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52CBFE13.8@aimvalley.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140107110609.74f71979@redhat.com>
On 01/07/14 11:06, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:32:01 +0100
> Daniel Borkmann<dborkman@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 01/06/2014 11:58 PM, Norbert van Bolhuis wrote:
>>>
>>> Our application uses raw AF_PACKET socket to send and receive
>>> on one particular ethernet interface.
>>>
>>> Recently we started using PACKET_MMAP (TPACKET_V2). This makes
>>> the Appl use a TX socket and a RX socket.
>>> Both sockets are bound to the same (eth) interface. I noticed
>>> the RX socket receives all frames that are sent via the
>>> TX socket (same process, different thread). This I do not want.
>>>
>>> I know it is supposed to happen for different processes
>>> (otherwise wireshark won't work), but I did not expect it to
>>> happen for one single process (with different threads).
>>>
>>> I can filter them out in user-space (PACKET_OUTGOING)
>>> or via kernel packet filter (SO_ATTACH_FILTER), but performance is
>>> critical.
>>>
>>> I wonder whether this (PACKET_MMAP) behaviour is OK.
>>
>> For your use-case, we recently introduced in d346a3fae3ff1
>> ("packet: introduce PACKET_QDISC_BYPASS socket option") a
>> bypass of dev_queue_xmit() (that internally invokes
>> dev_queue_xmit_nit()).
>>
>>> It did not happen before (with a non-PACKET_MMAP AF_PACKET socket
>>> which was used by both threads of the same Appl process). So
>>> why is it happening now ?
>>
>> Can you elaborate a bit on which kernel versions that behaviour
>> changed?
Sorry, I wasn't very clear. This does not regard kernel (versions).
With "before" I mean our previous version of our application which
used an AF_PACKET socket, but not the PACKET_MMAP option.
>>
>>> I'd say it makes no sense to make the same process receive its
>>> own transmitted frames on that same interface (unless its lo).
>
> Have you setup:
> ring->s_ll.sll_protocol = 0
>
> This is what I did in trafgen to avoid this problem.
>
> See line 55 in netsniff-ng/ring.c:
> https://github.com/borkmann/netsniff-ng/blob/c3602a995b21e8133c7f4fd1fb1e7e21b6a844f1/ring.c#L55
>
> Commit:
> https://github.com/borkmann/netsniff-ng/commit/c3602a995b21e8133c7f4fd1fb1e7e21b6a844f1
>
No I did not do that, I was checking my code against netsniff-ng-0.5.8-rc4.
But I just tried it, I believe I do the same as netsniff-ng-0.5.8-rc5, but it doesn't
work for me. Maybe because I have an old FC14 system (kernel 2.6.35.14-106.fc14.x86_64).
So I tried to see whether netsniff-ng-0.5.8-rc5/trafgen still makes the
kernel call packet_rcv() on my FC14 system. So I build and run it, but I'm not sure
how to (easily) check that. In anyway, Wireshark does capture the trafgen generated
frames, does that say anything ?
In the future, I can at least use PACKET_QDISC_BYPASS as a "workaround".
Thanks a lot for your answers.
---
Norbert
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-07 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-20 13:30 i386 vs x86_64 struct tpacket_hdr layout Norbert van Bolhuis
2013-12-20 18:38 ` David Miller
2013-12-20 18:45 ` Daniel Borkmann
2013-12-20 21:22 ` Norbert van Bolhuis
2014-01-06 22:58 ` single process receives own frames due to PACKET_MMAP Norbert van Bolhuis
2014-01-07 9:32 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-01-07 10:06 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-01-07 13:16 ` Norbert van Bolhuis [this message]
2014-01-07 13:47 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-01-07 14:09 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-01-07 15:16 ` Norbert van Bolhuis
2014-01-07 15:26 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-01-07 15:46 ` Norbert van Bolhuis
2014-01-07 15:57 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-01-08 14:18 ` Norbert van Bolhuis
2014-01-08 14:24 ` Daniel Borkmann
2014-01-08 14:36 ` Norbert van Bolhuis
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=52CBFE13.8@aimvalley.nl \
--to=nvbolhuis@aimvalley.nl \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=uaca@alumni.uv.es \
/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).