* [PATCH 1/2] netfilter: iptables: fix use of cluster match with 32 nodes
2009-05-05 13:13 [PATCH 0/2] netfilter fixes for 2.6.30-rc Pablo Neira Ayuso
@ 2009-05-05 13:14 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2009-05-05 15:47 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-05-05 13:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] netfilter: ctnetlink: fix wrong message type in user updates Pablo Neira Ayuso
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2009-05-05 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter-devel; +Cc: kaber
This patch fixes a problem when you use 32 nodes in the cluster
match:
% iptables -I PREROUTING -t mangle -i eth0 -m cluster \
--cluster-total-nodes 32 --cluster-local-node 32 \
--cluster-hash-seed 0xdeadbeef -j MARK --set-mark 0xffff
iptables: Invalid argument. Run `dmesg' for more information.
% dmesg | tail -1
xt_cluster: this node mask cannot be higher than the total number of nodes
The problem is related to this checking:
if (info->node_mask >= (1 << info->total_nodes)) {
printk(KERN_ERR "xt_cluster: this node mask cannot be "
"higher than the total number of nodes\n");
return false;
}
(1 << 32) is 1. Thus, the checking fails.
BTW, I said this before but I insist: I have only tested the cluster
match with 2 nodes getting ~45% extra performance in an active-active setup.
The maximum limit of 32 nodes is still completely arbitrary. I'd really
appreciate if people that have more nodes in their setups let me know.
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
---
include/linux/netfilter/xt_cluster.h | 2 ++
net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c | 8 +++++++-
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/netfilter/xt_cluster.h b/include/linux/netfilter/xt_cluster.h
index 5e0a0d0..8866826 100644
--- a/include/linux/netfilter/xt_cluster.h
+++ b/include/linux/netfilter/xt_cluster.h
@@ -12,4 +12,6 @@ struct xt_cluster_match_info {
u_int32_t flags;
};
+#define XT_CLUSTER_NODES_MAX 32
+
#endif /* _XT_CLUSTER_MATCH_H */
diff --git a/net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c b/net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c
index 6c48476..69a639f 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/xt_cluster.c
@@ -135,7 +135,13 @@ static bool xt_cluster_mt_checkentry(const struct xt_mtchk_param *par)
{
struct xt_cluster_match_info *info = par->matchinfo;
- if (info->node_mask >= (1 << info->total_nodes)) {
+ if (info->total_nodes > XT_CLUSTER_NODES_MAX) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "xt_cluster: you have exceeded the maximum "
+ "number of cluster nodes (%u > %u)\n",
+ info->total_nodes, XT_CLUSTER_NODES_MAX);
+ return false;
+ }
+ if (info->node_mask >= (1ULL << info->total_nodes)) {
printk(KERN_ERR "xt_cluster: this node mask cannot be "
"higher than the total number of nodes\n");
return false;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [PATCH 2/2] netfilter: ctnetlink: fix wrong message type in user updates
2009-05-05 13:13 [PATCH 0/2] netfilter fixes for 2.6.30-rc Pablo Neira Ayuso
2009-05-05 13:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] netfilter: iptables: fix use of cluster match with 32 nodes Pablo Neira Ayuso
@ 2009-05-05 13:14 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso
2009-05-05 15:49 ` Patrick McHardy
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso @ 2009-05-05 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netfilter-devel; +Cc: kaber
This patch fixes the wrong message type that are triggered by
user updates, the following commands:
(term1)# conntrack -I -p tcp -s 1.1.1.1 -d 2.2.2.2 -t 10 --sport 10 --dport 20 --state LISTEN
(term1)# conntrack -U -p tcp -s 1.1.1.1 -d 2.2.2.2 -t 10 --sport 10 --dport 20 --state SYN_SENT
(term1)# conntrack -U -p tcp -s 1.1.1.1 -d 2.2.2.2 -t 10 --sport 10 --dport 20 --state SYN_RECV
only trigger event message of type NEW, when only the first is NEW
while others should be UPDATE.
(term2)# conntrack -E
[NEW] tcp 6 10 LISTEN src=1.1.1.1 dst=2.2.2.2 sport=10 dport=20 [UNREPLIED] src=2.2.2.2 dst=1.1.1.1 sport=20 dport=10 mark=0
[NEW] tcp 6 10 SYN_SENT src=1.1.1.1 dst=2.2.2.2 sport=10 dport=20 [UNREPLIED] src=2.2.2.2 dst=1.1.1.1 sport=20 dport=10 mark=0
[NEW] tcp 6 10 SYN_RECV src=1.1.1.1 dst=2.2.2.2 sport=10 dport=20 [UNREPLIED] src=2.2.2.2 dst=1.1.1.1 sport=20 dport=10 mark=0
This patch also removes IPCT_REFRESH from the bitmask since it is
not of any use.
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
---
net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c | 48 ++++++++++++++--------------------
1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
index f13fc57..c523f0b 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
@@ -1186,28 +1186,6 @@ ctnetlink_change_conntrack(struct nf_conn *ct, struct nlattr *cda[])
return 0;
}
-static inline void
-ctnetlink_event_report(struct nf_conn *ct, u32 pid, int report)
-{
- unsigned int events = 0;
-
- if (test_bit(IPS_EXPECTED_BIT, &ct->status))
- events |= IPCT_RELATED;
- else
- events |= IPCT_NEW;
-
- nf_conntrack_event_report(IPCT_STATUS |
- IPCT_HELPER |
- IPCT_REFRESH |
- IPCT_PROTOINFO |
- IPCT_NATSEQADJ |
- IPCT_MARK |
- events,
- ct,
- pid,
- report);
-}
-
static struct nf_conn *
ctnetlink_create_conntrack(struct nlattr *cda[],
struct nf_conntrack_tuple *otuple,
@@ -1373,6 +1351,7 @@ ctnetlink_new_conntrack(struct sock *ctnl, struct sk_buff *skb,
err = -ENOENT;
if (nlh->nlmsg_flags & NLM_F_CREATE) {
struct nf_conn *ct;
+ enum ip_conntrack_events events;
ct = ctnetlink_create_conntrack(cda, &otuple,
&rtuple, u3);
@@ -1383,9 +1362,18 @@ ctnetlink_new_conntrack(struct sock *ctnl, struct sk_buff *skb,
err = 0;
nf_conntrack_get(&ct->ct_general);
spin_unlock_bh(&nf_conntrack_lock);
- ctnetlink_event_report(ct,
- NETLINK_CB(skb).pid,
- nlmsg_report(nlh));
+ if (test_bit(IPS_EXPECTED_BIT, &ct->status))
+ events = IPCT_RELATED;
+ else
+ events = IPCT_NEW;
+
+ nf_conntrack_event_report(IPCT_STATUS |
+ IPCT_HELPER |
+ IPCT_PROTOINFO |
+ IPCT_NATSEQADJ |
+ IPCT_MARK | events,
+ ct, NETLINK_CB(skb).pid,
+ nlmsg_report(nlh));
nf_ct_put(ct);
} else
spin_unlock_bh(&nf_conntrack_lock);
@@ -1404,9 +1392,13 @@ ctnetlink_new_conntrack(struct sock *ctnl, struct sk_buff *skb,
if (err == 0) {
nf_conntrack_get(&ct->ct_general);
spin_unlock_bh(&nf_conntrack_lock);
- ctnetlink_event_report(ct,
- NETLINK_CB(skb).pid,
- nlmsg_report(nlh));
+ nf_conntrack_event_report(IPCT_STATUS |
+ IPCT_HELPER |
+ IPCT_PROTOINFO |
+ IPCT_NATSEQADJ |
+ IPCT_MARK,
+ ct, NETLINK_CB(skb).pid,
+ nlmsg_report(nlh));
nf_ct_put(ct);
} else
spin_unlock_bh(&nf_conntrack_lock);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread