From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, maze@google.com,
shiming.cheng@mediatek.com, daniel@iogearbox.net,
lena.wang@mediatek.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] gso: fix gso fraglist segmentation after pull from frag_list
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:09:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66f46003a38a0_65fdc29433@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7144e848-9919-44a5-a313-f9b2076532bf@nbd.name>
Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 22.09.24 17:03, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> >
> > Detect gso fraglist skbs with corrupted geometry (see below) and
> > pass these to skb_segment instead of skb_segment_list, as the first
> > can segment them correctly.
> >
> > Valid SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST skbs
> > - consist of two or more segments
> > - the head_skb holds the protocol headers plus first gso_size
> > - one or more frag_list skbs hold exactly one segment
> > - all but the last must be gso_size
> >
> > Optional datapath hooks such as NAT and BPF (bpf_skb_pull_data) can
> > modify these skbs, breaking these invariants.
> >
> > In extreme cases they pull all data into skb linear. For UDP, this
> > causes a NULL ptr deref in __udpv4_gso_segment_list_csum at
> > udp_hdr(seg->next)->dest.
> >
> > Detect invalid geometry due to pull, by checking head_skb size.
> > Don't just drop, as this may blackhole a destination. Convert to be
> > able to pass to regular skb_segment.
> >
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240428142913.18666-1-shiming.cheng@mediatek.com/
> > Fixes: 3a1296a38d0c ("net: Support GRO/GSO fraglist chaining.")
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> >
> > ---
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > index d842303587af..e457fa9143a6 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > @@ -296,8 +296,16 @@ struct sk_buff *__udp_gso_segment(struct sk_buff *gso_skb,
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > - if (skb_shinfo(gso_skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST)
> > - return __udp_gso_segment_list(gso_skb, features, is_ipv6);
> > + if (skb_shinfo(gso_skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST) {
> > + /* Detect modified geometry and pass these to skb_segment. */
> > + if (skb_pagelen(gso_skb) - sizeof(*uh) == skb_shinfo(gso_skb)->gso_size)
> > + return __udp_gso_segment_list(gso_skb, features, is_ipv6);
> > +
> > + /* Setup csum, as fraglist skips this in udp4_gro_receive. */
> > + gso_skb->csum_start = skb_transport_header(gso_skb) - gso_skb->head;
> > + gso_skb->csum_offset = offsetof(struct udphdr, check);
> > + gso_skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_PARTIAL;
>
> I also noticed this uh->check update done by udp4_gro_complete only in
> case of non-fraglist GRO:
>
> if (uh->check)
> uh->check = ~udp_v4_check(skb->len - nhoff, iph->saddr,
> iph->daddr, 0);
>
> I didn't see any equivalent in your patch. Is it missing or left out
> intentionally?
Thanks. That was not intentional. I think you're right. Am a bit
concerned that all this testing did not catch it. Perhaps because
CHECKSUM_PARTIAL looped to ingress on the same machine is simply
interpreted as CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY. Need to look into that.
If respinning this, I should also change the Fixes to
Fixes: 9fd1ff5d2ac7 ("udp: Support UDP fraglist GRO/GSO.")
Analogous to the eventual TCP fix to
Fixes: bee88cd5bd83 ("net: add support for segmenting TCP fraglist GSO packets")
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-25 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-22 15:03 [PATCH net] gso: fix gso fraglist segmentation after pull from frag_list Willem de Bruijn
2024-09-24 17:47 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-24 19:50 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-09-25 8:10 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-25 19:09 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2024-09-25 20:59 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-25 21:12 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-26 7:19 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-09-26 7:38 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-26 7:45 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-09-26 7:16 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-09-26 9:17 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-09-26 9:22 ` Willem de Bruijn
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=66f46003a38a0_65fdc29433@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lena.wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=maze@google.com \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=shiming.cheng@mediatek.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
/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