From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Yan Zhai <yan@cloudflare.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Josh Hunt <johunt@akamai.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] udp: gso: fix MTU check for small packets
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:33:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6797992c28a23_3f1a294d6@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z5cgWh/6bRQm9vVU@debian.debian>
Yan Zhai wrote:
> Commit 4094871db1d6 ("udp: only do GSO if # of segs > 1") avoided GSO
> for small packets. But the kernel currently dismisses GSO requests only
> after checking MTU on gso_size. This means any packets, regardless of
> their payload sizes, would be dropped when MTU is smaller than requested
> gso_size.
Is this a realistic concern? How did you encounter this in practice.
It *is* a misconfiguration to configure a gso_size larger than MTU.
> Meanwhile, EINVAL would be returned in this case, making it
> very misleading to debug.
Misleading is subjective. I'm not sure what is misleading here. From
my above comment, I believe this is correctly EINVAL.
That said, if this impacts a real workload we could reconsider
relaxing the check. I.e., allowing through packets even when an
application has clearly misconfigured UDP_SEGMENT.
>
> Ideally, do not check any GSO related constraints when payload size is
> smaller than requested gso_size, and return EMSGSIZE on MTU check
> failure consistently for all packets to ease debugging.
>
> Fixes: 4094871db1d6 ("udp: only do GSO if # of segs > 1")
> Signed-off-by: Yan Zhai <yan@cloudflare.com>
> ---
> net/ipv4/udp.c | 18 ++++++++----------
> net/ipv6/udp.c | 18 ++++++++----------
> tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> index c472c9a57cf6..9aed1b4a871f 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> @@ -1137,13 +1137,13 @@ static int udp_send_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct flowi4 *fl4,
> uh->len = htons(len);
> uh->check = 0;
>
> - if (cork->gso_size) {
> + if (cork->gso_size && datalen > cork->gso_size) {
> const int hlen = skb_network_header_len(skb) +
> sizeof(struct udphdr);
>
> if (hlen + cork->gso_size > cork->fragsize) {
> kfree_skb(skb);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return -EMSGSIZE;
> }
> if (datalen > cork->gso_size * UDP_MAX_SEGMENTS) {
> kfree_skb(skb);
> @@ -1158,15 +1158,13 @@ static int udp_send_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct flowi4 *fl4,
> return -EIO;
> }
>
> - if (datalen > cork->gso_size) {
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = cork->gso_size;
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_UDP_L4;
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = DIV_ROUND_UP(datalen,
> - cork->gso_size);
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = cork->gso_size;
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_UDP_L4;
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = DIV_ROUND_UP(datalen,
> + cork->gso_size);
>
> - /* Don't checksum the payload, skb will get segmented */
> - goto csum_partial;
> - }
> + /* Don't checksum the payload, skb will get segmented */
> + goto csum_partial;
> }
>
> if (is_udplite) /* UDP-Lite */
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/udp.c b/net/ipv6/udp.c
> index 6671daa67f4f..6cdc8ce4c6f9 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/udp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/udp.c
> @@ -1385,13 +1385,13 @@ static int udp_v6_send_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct flowi6 *fl6,
> uh->len = htons(len);
> uh->check = 0;
>
> - if (cork->gso_size) {
> + if (cork->gso_size && datalen > cork->gso_size) {
> const int hlen = skb_network_header_len(skb) +
> sizeof(struct udphdr);
>
> if (hlen + cork->gso_size > cork->fragsize) {
> kfree_skb(skb);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + return -EMSGSIZE;
> }
> if (datalen > cork->gso_size * UDP_MAX_SEGMENTS) {
> kfree_skb(skb);
> @@ -1406,15 +1406,13 @@ static int udp_v6_send_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct flowi6 *fl6,
> return -EIO;
> }
>
> - if (datalen > cork->gso_size) {
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = cork->gso_size;
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_UDP_L4;
> - skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = DIV_ROUND_UP(datalen,
> - cork->gso_size);
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = cork->gso_size;
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_UDP_L4;
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs = DIV_ROUND_UP(datalen,
> + cork->gso_size);
>
> - /* Don't checksum the payload, skb will get segmented */
> - goto csum_partial;
> - }
> + /* Don't checksum the payload, skb will get segmented */
> + goto csum_partial;
> }
>
> if (is_udplite)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso.c
> index 3f2fca02fec5..fb73f1c331fb 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso.c
> @@ -102,6 +102,13 @@ struct testcase testcases_v4[] = {
> .gso_len = CONST_MSS_V4,
> .r_num_mss = 1,
> },
> + {
> + /* datalen <= MSS < gso_len: will fall back to no GSO */
> + .tlen = CONST_MSS_V4,
> + .gso_len = CONST_MSS_V4 + 1,
> + .r_num_mss = 0,
> + .r_len_last = CONST_MSS_V4,
> + },
> {
> /* send a single MSS + 1B */
> .tlen = CONST_MSS_V4 + 1,
> @@ -205,6 +212,13 @@ struct testcase testcases_v6[] = {
> .gso_len = CONST_MSS_V6,
> .r_num_mss = 1,
> },
> + {
> + /* datalen <= MSS < gso_len: will fall back to no GSO */
> + .tlen = CONST_MSS_V6,
> + .gso_len = CONST_MSS_V6 + 1,
> + .r_num_mss = 0,
> + .r_len_last = CONST_MSS_V6,
> + },
> {
> /* send a single MSS + 1B */
> .tlen = CONST_MSS_V6 + 1,
> --
> 2.30.2
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-27 14:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-27 5:57 [PATCH] udp: gso: fix MTU check for small packets Yan Zhai
2025-01-27 14:33 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2025-01-27 17:00 ` Yan Zhai
2025-01-28 14:45 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-29 4:31 ` Yan Zhai
2025-01-29 14:08 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-29 16:48 ` Yan Zhai
2025-01-30 7:58 ` Yan Zhai
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=6797992c28a23_3f1a294d6@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=johunt@akamai.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=yan@cloudflare.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