From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Zhang Chen <zhangchen.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Cc: Yang Hongyang <hongyang.yang@easystack.cn>,
"eddie . dong" <eddie.dong@intel.com>,
qemu devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Li Zhijian <lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com>,
zhanghailiang <zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 3/3] filter-rewriter: rewrite tcp packet to keep secondary connection
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 14:34:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <576A3174.2010905@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <576A020E.8040804@cn.fujitsu.com>
On 2016年06月22日 11:12, Zhang Chen wrote:
>
>
> On 06/20/2016 08:14 PM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
>> * Jason Wang (jasowang@redhat.com) wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2016年06月14日 19:15, Zhang Chen wrote:
>>>> We will rewrite tcp packet secondary received and sent.
>>> More verbose please. E.g which fields were rewrote and why.
>
> OK.
>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhang Chen <zhangchen.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian <lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> net/filter-rewriter.c | 94
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>> trace-events | 3 ++
>>>> 2 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/filter-rewriter.c b/net/filter-rewriter.c
>>>> index 12f88c5..86a2f53 100644
>>>> --- a/net/filter-rewriter.c
>>>> +++ b/net/filter-rewriter.c
>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>> #include "qemu/main-loop.h"
>>>> #include "qemu/iov.h"
>>>> #include "net/checksum.h"
>>>> +#include "trace.h"
>>>> #define FILTER_COLO_REWRITER(obj) \
>>>> OBJECT_CHECK(RewriterState, (obj), TYPE_FILTER_REWRITER)
>>>> @@ -64,6 +65,75 @@ static int is_tcp_packet(Packet *pkt)
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> +static int handle_primary_tcp_pkt(NetFilterState *nf,
>>>> + Connection *conn,
>>>> + Packet *pkt)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct tcphdr *tcp_pkt;
>>>> +
>>>> + tcp_pkt = (struct tcphdr *)pkt->transport_layer;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (trace_event_get_state(TRACE_COLO_FILTER_REWRITER_DEBUG)) {
>>> Why not use tracepoints directly?
>> Because trace can't cope with you having to do an allocation/free.
>>
>>>> + char *sdebug, *ddebug;
>>>> + sdebug = strdup(inet_ntoa(pkt->ip->ip_src));
>>>> + ddebug = strdup(inet_ntoa(pkt->ip->ip_dst));
>>>> + fprintf(stderr, "%s: src/dst: %s/%s p: seq/ack=%u/%u"
>>>> + " flags=%x\n", __func__, sdebug, ddebug,
>>>> + ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_seq), ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_ack),
>>>> + tcp_pkt->th_flags);
>> However, this should use the trace_ call to write the result even if
>> it's
>> using trace_event_get_state to switch the whole block on/off.
>
> I will fix it in next version.
>
>>
>>>> + g_free(sdebug);
>>>> + g_free(ddebug);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + if (((tcp_pkt->th_flags & (TH_ACK | TH_SYN)) == TH_ACK)) {
>>>> + /* save primary colo tcp packet seq */
>>>> + conn->primary_seq = ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_ack) - 1;
>>> Looks like primary_seq will only be updated during handshake, I
>>> wonder how
>>> this works.
>
> OK.
> We assume that colo guest is a tcp server.
>
> Firstly, client start a tcp handshake. the packet's seq=client_seq,
> ack=0,flag=SYN. COLO primary guest get this pkt and mirror(filter-mirror)
> to secondary guest, secondary get it use filter-redirector.
> Then,primary guest response
> pkt(seq=primary_seq,ack=client_seq+1,flag=ACK|SYN).
> secondary guest response
> pkt(seq=secondary_seq,ack=client_seq+1,flag=ACK|SYN).
> In here,we use filter-rewriter save the secondary_seq to it's tcp
> connection.
> Finally handshake,client send
> pkt(seq=client_seq+1,ack=primary_seq+1,flag=ACK).
> Here,filter-rewriter can get primary_seq, and rewrite ack from
> primary_seq+1
> to secondary_seq+1, recalculate checksum. So the secondary tcp connection
> kept good.
>
> When we send/recv packet.
> client send
> pkt(seq=client_seq+1+data_len,ack=primary_seq+1,flag=ACK|PSH).
> filter-rewriter rewrite ack and send to secondary guest.
If I read your code correctly, secondary_seq will only be updated during
handshake. So the ack seq will always be same for each packet received
by secondary?
> primary guest response
> pkt(seq=primary_seq+1,ack=client_seq+1+data_len,flag=ACK)
> secondary guest response
> pkt(seq=secondary_seq+1,ack=client_seq+1+data_len,flag=ACK)
Is ACK a must here?
> we rewrite secondary guest seq from secondary_seq+1 to primary_seq+1.
> So tcp connection kept good.
What if, consider we have a large window, so server(guest) want to send
more than one TCP packets? The code can only advance primary_seq when
we've received an ack which seems wrong.
So it will be very tricky if you don't track offset. Basically, what I
suggest is rather simple:
1) calculate offset during handshake, e.g offset = secondary_seq_syn -
primary_seq_syn
2) in handle_primary_tcp_pkt: tcp_pkt->th_ack += offset;
3) in handle_secondary_tcp_pkt: tcp_pkt->th_seq -= offset;
Looks like this can handle more cases and more robust than current code?
>
>
>> This code really needs commenting to make it see what's going on; each
>> of these functions should say which way the packet is going (e.g.
>> 'handle packets to the primary from the secondary') - there's a lot
>> of packet flows going on and without the comments it's very hard to
>> follow.
>
> Thanks..I will add comments in next version.
>
>>
>> I think this could be because we're fixing up the sequence numbers on
>> the
>> secondary once we've received the first response from the primary, so
>> it's
>> only the first packet of each connection that the primary has to do
>> this on -
>> but hmm I'm not sure without some comments.
>
> Yes,you are right.
>
>
>
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>>> +
>>>> + /* adjust tcp seq to make secondary guest handle it */
>>>> + tcp_pkt->th_ack = htonl(conn->secondary_seq + 1);
>>> I'm not sure this can work for all cases. I believe we should also
>>> rewrite
>>> seq here. And to me, a better approach is to track the offset of seq
>>> between
>>> pri and sec during handshake and rewrite both ack and seq based on this
>>> offset.
>
> In the vast majority of cases, colo guest is a tcp server.
> client kernel and guest kernel make the tcp seq work good.
> we don't need rewrite seq here. we just need rewrite ack
> and checksum can make secondary tcp connection work. If
> colo guest is a tcp client,maybe we can wait colo-compare
> do a checkpoint(secondary haven't send tcp packet in time).
>
>
> Thanks
> Zhang Chen
>
>
>>>> + net_checksum_calculate((uint8_t *)pkt->data, pkt->size);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int handle_secondary_tcp_pkt(NetFilterState *nf,
>>>> + Connection *conn,
>>>> + Packet *pkt)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct tcphdr *tcp_pkt;
>>>> +
>>>> + tcp_pkt = (struct tcphdr *)pkt->transport_layer;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (trace_event_get_state(TRACE_COLO_FILTER_REWRITER_DEBUG)) {
>>>> + char *sdebug, *ddebug;
>>>> + sdebug = strdup(inet_ntoa(pkt->ip->ip_src));
>>>> + ddebug = strdup(inet_ntoa(pkt->ip->ip_dst));
>>>> + printf("handle_secondary_tcp_pkt conn->secondary_seq =
>>>> %u,\n",
>>>> + conn->secondary_seq);
>>>> + printf("handle_secondary_tcp_pkt conn->primary_seq = %u,\n",
>>>> + conn->primary_seq);
>>>> + fprintf(stderr, "%s: src/dst: %s/%s p: seq/ack=%u/%u"
>>>> + " flags=%x\n", __func__, sdebug, ddebug,
>>>> + ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_seq), ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_ack),
>>>> + tcp_pkt->th_flags);
>>>> + g_free(sdebug);
>>>> + g_free(ddebug);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + if (((tcp_pkt->th_flags & (TH_ACK | TH_SYN)) == (TH_ACK |
>>>> TH_SYN))) {
>>>> + /* save client's seq */
>>>> + conn->secondary_seq = ntohl(tcp_pkt->th_seq);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + if ((tcp_pkt->th_flags & (TH_ACK | TH_SYN)) == TH_ACK) {
>>>> + tcp_pkt->th_seq = htonl(conn->primary_seq + 1);
>>>> + net_checksum_calculate((uint8_t *)pkt->data, pkt->size);
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static ssize_t colo_rewriter_receive_iov(NetFilterState *nf,
>>>> NetClientState *sender,
>>>> unsigned flags,
>>>> @@ -106,10 +176,30 @@ static ssize_t
>>>> colo_rewriter_receive_iov(NetFilterState *nf,
>>>> if (sender == nf->netdev) {
>>>> /* This packet is sent by netdev itself */
>>>> /* NET_FILTER_DIRECTION_TX */
>>>> - /* handle_primary_tcp_pkt */
>>>> + if (!handle_primary_tcp_pkt(nf, conn, pkt)) {
>>>> + qemu_net_queue_send(s->incoming_queue, sender, 0,
>>>> + (const uint8_t *)pkt->data, pkt->size, NULL);
>>>> + packet_destroy(pkt, NULL);
>>>> + pkt = NULL;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * We block the packet here,after rewrite pkt
>>>> + * and will send it
>>>> + */
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> + }
>>>> } else {
>>>> /* NET_FILTER_DIRECTION_RX */
>>>> - /* handle_secondary_tcp_pkt */
>>>> + if (!handle_secondary_tcp_pkt(nf, conn, pkt)) {
>>>> + qemu_net_queue_send(s->incoming_queue, sender, 0,
>>>> + (const uint8_t *)pkt->data, pkt->size, NULL);
>>>> + packet_destroy(pkt, NULL);
>>>> + pkt = NULL;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * We block the packet here,after rewrite pkt
>>>> + * and will send it
>>>> + */
>>>> + return 1;
>>>> + }
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>> diff --git a/trace-events b/trace-events
>>>> index 6686cdf..5d798c6 100644
>>>> --- a/trace-events
>>>> +++ b/trace-events
>>>> @@ -1927,3 +1927,6 @@ colo_compare_icmp_miscompare_mtu(const char
>>>> *sta, int size) ": %s %d"
>>>> colo_compare_ip_info(int psize, const char *sta, const char
>>>> *stb, int ssize, const char *stc, const char *std) "ppkt size = %d,
>>>> ip_src = %s, ip_dst = %s, spkt size = %d, ip_src = %s, ip_dst = %s"
>>>> colo_old_packet_check_found(int64_t old_time) "%" PRId64
>>>> colo_compare_miscompare(void) ""
>>>> +
>>>> +# net/filter-rewriter.c
>>>> +colo_filter_rewriter_debug(void) ""
>> --
>> Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-22 6:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-14 11:15 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] filter-rewriter: introduce filter-rewriter Zhang Chen
2016-06-14 11:15 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/3] filter-rewriter: introduce filter-rewriter initialization Zhang Chen
2016-06-14 11:15 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 2/3] filter-rewriter: track connection and parse packet Zhang Chen
2016-06-14 11:15 ` [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 3/3] filter-rewriter: rewrite tcp packet to keep secondary connection Zhang Chen
2016-06-20 6:27 ` Jason Wang
2016-06-20 12:14 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2016-06-22 3:12 ` Zhang Chen
2016-06-22 6:34 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2016-06-23 10:48 ` Zhang Chen
2016-06-24 6:08 ` Jason Wang
2016-06-28 6:33 ` Zhang Chen
2016-06-29 1:55 ` Jason Wang
2016-06-29 6:13 ` Zhang Chen
2016-06-30 12:17 ` Jason Wang
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=576A3174.2010905@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=eddie.dong@intel.com \
--cc=hongyang.yang@easystack.cn \
--cc=lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com \
--cc=zhangchen.fnst@cn.fujitsu.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).