From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com (mail-wr1-f51.google.com [209.85.221.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00EB61DE4C1 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 14:45:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.51 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728398749; cv=none; b=U5xm2n9O6Tcsvuvacl8TLJvVddnMVjBEd9U/LUW5xSZpDCtqVj0fO2QjQQE44dq/10V53p6f3TT0YIyXQ9iR09BSBnjEXpJhZspNgpcBzsZX2brluBBytt2IfatjpzuMXA79qjY0JwIB1QtRshcIPAAvpeJ2kpD1DOlPG1XYf34= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728398749; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OEPIoOSafXbHth2X0cZbo48ef5bM+/sWgUUWroovlLo=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=hrJDLz71qRNWLZw+ViiMlRXfZJuiLjaulNi7KemEU7ZOL4RWXzVtbwmb3KxsIY5wqBXbdwllbl69X1dxp2OlX07aYT0wa0QkAbIrZ6/CGZ/718PGFPT2FVAyCdnFcaX4Xs100JcAgcguDCePyTa4aBJTc2ftjb41H/7Vr8JLtno= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=blackwall.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=blackwall.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=blackwall-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@blackwall-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b=mqbEA6uk; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.51 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=blackwall.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=blackwall.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=blackwall-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.i=@blackwall-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com header.b="mqbEA6uk" Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-37ce9644daaso3727994f8f.3 for ; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 07:45:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blackwall-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1728398746; x=1729003546; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gyA0o4MkgtBHEt4wv5eC/jzDocCl8Fg8KhFwA03Dsp8=; b=mqbEA6ukgwRZPTNdc2kPHjiM9uSGj1BnQSJjJ1K9EDj06ZEMlXAtW3i/zQYdOyaeZm 5uPWd4ykWGei3+M78ZBoXtT4vGcaalVQz+BD6badABHDCF6fSUDailtzXq5WMJ3K/AJ/ 8DQVk2z9jlEt+axc3MMyCwvPXNlOqMwFtTgjmHneJWgKPByhOIAEsMxk6yTIsEgkz3LW F9FBxbfEq4hUkuiGCKpN+Tc+fby099a+oJJBFrC4AmNVMMlka3GF4rsCMeq/ozMtoRTy NxOz1G5aAWDt3IpCSbahgtNoptgssqDgzvzAdJWJ0/ppNP8a3fY4vYR1bs+m5+jl6rvs 7gEg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728398746; x=1729003546; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=gyA0o4MkgtBHEt4wv5eC/jzDocCl8Fg8KhFwA03Dsp8=; b=i1CF2Dk97vy6aKRCveZlnklbanzmWNhwcWiD6zuT6gkekcHd3jK66OUu8DFM6F4gOu 3BxlOY2PlkSHJ6nU3waYh/EcBZgmbWh/HYniY7cdaeLGeliofc6MyH8fi3GjVPZXzqCJ wi7L5QOZgIt4rPDI4t/bE5OAhJ3BjeqJ/TgABqbYOcJVPU1yplEbcjzRO341Lx8r++3d 120pMlet7E/07Uk2sOkcTAZByzd+vPOyL8g5eHy3ACQD4++hrZmT6iRNSGETMeTupHIc ALI6KDPl4CpVselEmXmEdi/AejKL23dYip6FnldWHFS0nQjtqrZPDht1n7D4wCRyJqnT To8w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWYEFu0huXS/+FlK92Af9AetCbOiXQU2pSpnTluhtUW4XTME7WDC8slQZMPjHlAC+8bAOqiG1U=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwdQnlZcWkci28O5H8Y7PaS9UdFZzW06ANXyna7JwtLivat2/dC a44yJ5Bt9oSIn8YOgQiJMPL2RFpXdQzXgK7/kvIjwxyOHffeDuriWyKEOFamDCc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHnpqRbMJPQQ/KRJ6k8Ul3NfjlAwYMFqUBQC1j92wKGfsiXs0AaFgp4Y7hJhUm28QP/eeU1yQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5c88:0:b0:37d:370a:5248 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-37d370a5384mr837280f8f.39.1728398746139; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 07:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.245] ([62.73.69.208]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-37d1697024fsm8246403f8f.95.2024.10.08.07.45.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Oct 2024 07:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8f285237-757b-4637-a76d-a35f27e4e748@blackwall.org> Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 17:45:44 +0300 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] bridge: use promisc arg instead of skb flags To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Cc: Amedeo Baragiola , Roopa Prabhu , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , bridge@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20241005014514.1541240-1-ingamedeo@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Nikolay Aleksandrov In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/10/2024 17:30, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > Hi Nikolay, > > On Sat, Oct 05, 2024 at 05:06:56PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: >> On 05/10/2024 04:44, Amedeo Baragiola wrote: >>> Since commit 751de2012eaf ("netfilter: br_netfilter: skip conntrack input hook for promisc packets") >>> a second argument (promisc) has been added to br_pass_frame_up which >>> represents whether the interface is in promiscuous mode. However, >>> internally - in one remaining case - br_pass_frame_up checks the device >>> flags derived from skb instead of the argument being passed in. >>> This one-line changes addresses this inconsistency. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Amedeo Baragiola >>> --- >>> net/bridge/br_input.c | 3 +-- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_input.c b/net/bridge/br_input.c >>> index ceaa5a89b947..156c18f42fa3 100644 >>> --- a/net/bridge/br_input.c >>> +++ b/net/bridge/br_input.c >>> @@ -50,8 +50,7 @@ static int br_pass_frame_up(struct sk_buff *skb, bool promisc) >>> * packet is allowed except in promisc mode when someone >>> * may be running packet capture. >>> */ >>> - if (!(brdev->flags & IFF_PROMISC) && >>> - !br_allowed_egress(vg, skb)) { >>> + if (!promisc && !br_allowed_egress(vg, skb)) { >>> kfree_skb(skb); >>> return NET_RX_DROP; >>> } >> >> This is subtle, but it does change behaviour when a BR_FDB_LOCAL dst >> is found it will always drop the traffic after this patch (w/ promisc) if it >> doesn't pass br_allowed_egress(). It would've been allowed before, but current >> situation does make the patch promisc bit inconsistent, i.e. we get >> there because of BR_FDB_LOCAL regardless of the promisc flag. >> >> Because we can have a BR_FDB_LOCAL dst and still pass up such skb because of >> the flag instead of local_rcv (see br_br_handle_frame_finish()). >> >> CCing also Pablo for a second pair of eyes and as the original patch >> author. :) >> >> Pablo WDYT? >> >> Just FYI we definitely want to see all traffic if promisc is set, so >> this patch is a no-go. > > promisc is always _false_ for BR_FDB_LOCAL dst: > > if (dst) { > unsigned long now = jiffies; > > if (test_bit(BR_FDB_LOCAL, &dst->flags)) > return br_pass_frame_up(skb, false); > > ... > } > > if (local_rcv) > return br_pass_frame_up(skb, promisc); > >>> - if (!(brdev->flags & IFF_PROMISC) && >>> - !br_allowed_egress(vg, skb)) { >>> + if (!promisc && !br_allowed_egress(vg, skb)) { > > Then, this is not equivalent. > > But, why is br_allowed_egress() skipped depending on brdev->flags & IFF_PROMISC? > > I mean, how does this combination work? > > BR_FDB_LOCAL dst AND (brdev->flags & IFF_PROMISC) AND BR_INPUT_SKB_CB(skb)->vlan_filtered The bridge should see all packets come up if promisc flag is set, regardless if the vlan exists or not, so br_allowed_egress() is skipped entirely. As I commented separately the patch changes that behaviour and suddenly these packets (BR_FDB_LOCAL fdb + promisc bit set on the bridge dev) won't be sent up to the bridge. I think the current code should stay as-is, but wanted to get your opinion if we can still hit the warning that was fixed because we can still hit that code with a BR_FDB_LOCAL dst with promisc flag set and the promisc flag will be == false in that case.