From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>
Subject: Re: !
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 18:45:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSd+jRVCWq5Y-E=vsJcvSL2MpgyjpYaNk8o2JPMWE8ryyg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7974ce16adc27164afa63170483bb4371894c5e1.camel@redhat.com>
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:51 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2021-03-23 at 21:54 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > I did not look at that before your suggestion. Thanks for pointing out.
> > >
> > > I think the problem is specific to UDP: when processing the outer UDP
> > > header that is potentially eligible for both NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_L4 and
> > > gro_receive aggregation and that is the root cause of the problem
> > > addressed here.
> >
> > Can you elaborate on the exact problem? The commit mentions "inner
> > protocol corruption, as no overaly network parameters is taken in
> > account at aggregation time."
> >
> > My understanding is that these are udp gro aggregated GSO_UDP_L4
> > packets forwarded to a udp tunnel device. They are not encapsulated
> > yet. Which overlay network parameters are not, but should have been,
> > taken account at aggregation time?
>
> The scenario is as follow:
>
> * a NIC has NETIF_F_GRO_UDP_FWD or NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST enabled
> * an UDP tunnel is configured/enabled in the system
> * the above NIC receives some UDP-tunneled packets, targeting the
> mentioned tunnel
> * the packets go through gro_receive and they reache
> 'udp_gro_receive()' while processing the outer UDP header.
>
> without this patch, udp_gro_receive_segment() will kick in and the
> outer UDP header will be aggregated according to SKB_GSO_FRAGLIST
> or SKB_GSO_UDP_L4, even if this is really e.g. a vxlan packet.
>
> Different vxlan ids will be ignored/aggregated to the same GSO packet.
> Inner headers will be ignored, too, so that e.g. TCP over vxlan push
> packets will be held in the GRO engine till the next flush, etc.
>
> Please let me know if the above is more clear.
Yes, thanks a lot! That's very concrete.
When processing the outer UDP tunnel header in the gro completion
path, it is incorrectly identified as an inner UDP transport layer due
to NAPI_GRO_CB(skb) identifying that such a layer is present
(is_flist).
The issue is that the UDP GRO layer distinguishes between tunnel and
transport layer too late, in udp_gro_complete, while an offending
assumption of that UDP == transport layer was already made in the
callers udp4_gro_complete and udp6_gro_complete.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-24 22:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-21 17:01 [PATCH net-next 0/8] udp: GRO L4 improvements Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 1/8] udp: fixup csum for GSO receive slow path Paolo Abeni
2021-03-22 13:18 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-22 16:34 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 1:45 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-24 1:49 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-24 14:37 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 22:36 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-25 10:56 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-25 13:53 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-25 16:47 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 2/8] udp: skip fwd/list GRO for tunnel packets Paolo Abeni
2021-03-22 13:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-22 16:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 1:54 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-24 14:50 ` ! Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 22:45 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 3/8] udp: properly complete L4 GRO over UDP tunnel packet Paolo Abeni
2021-03-22 13:30 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-22 16:59 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 2:13 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 4/8] udp: never accept GSO_FRAGLIST packets Paolo Abeni
2021-03-22 13:42 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-22 17:09 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 2:21 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-24 18:59 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-24 22:12 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-25 11:50 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 5/8] vxlan: allow L4 GRO passthrou Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 6/8] geneve: allow UDP " Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 7/8] bareudp: " Paolo Abeni
2021-03-21 17:01 ` [PATCH net-next 8/8] selftests: net: add UDP GRO forwarding self-tests Paolo Abeni
2021-03-22 13:44 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-03-22 17:18 ` Paolo Abeni
2021-03-23 17:12 ` Paolo Abeni
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-10-15 16:34 👑 sunil saraff
2017-07-23 17:29 ? Robert
2016-05-07 21:24 ? Robert
2013-11-23 0:47 ?? seyed.jamaly
2013-11-07 4:57 ?? jjorge
2013-08-09 20:55 : JOEL SULLINS
2012-08-25 7:06 $ Xli
2011-10-31 17:58 ! FBI
2004-05-07 10:07 :) majordomo
2004-05-06 15:12 :) becker
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='CA+FuTSd+jRVCWq5Y-E=vsJcvSL2MpgyjpYaNk8o2JPMWE8ryyg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=alobakin@pm.me \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).