From: Andrew Melnichenko <andrew@daynix.com>
To: Yan Vugenfirer <yvugenfi@redhat.com>, lwp_1994@163.com
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
"Benditovich, Yuri" <ybendito@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/ebpf: Fix IPv4 fragmentation identify
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:55:47 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABcq3pHBFPEWO19vyNcqBfwboSJBLLgD_V3VBPRzOCkmb=brEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABcq3pEtn7yvJNg1AB1_L7V0H_9_xTFDVtNHA4fC8GtxNtEO+w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all,
Also, for those changes to have an effect, a new eBPF skeleton must be
generated.
On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 1:58 PM Andrew Melnichenko <andrew@daynix.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I don't think that checking DF flag is a case for figuring out that
> the packet is a fragment of some big datagram.
> For nonfragmented packets, DF may not be set.
> We need to check that the fragment offset is 0.
> Actually, it's a good idea to check that MF flag is not set too. So we
> can find the first fragment that doesn't require steering.
> So the code may look something like this:
> ```
> info->is_fragmented = !!(bpf_ntohs(ip.frag_off) & (0x2000 | 0x1fff));
> // checking MF and frag offset.
> OR
> info->is_fragmented = !!(bpf_ntohs(ip.frag_off) & ~0x4000); // if we
> consider that CE always 0(which is always should be)
> ```
>
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 9:12 AM Yan Vugenfirer <yvugenfi@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > FYI
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: luwenpeng <lwp_1994@163.com>
> > Date: Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 3:21 PM
> > Subject: [PATCH] tools/ebpf: Fix IPv4 fragmentation identify
> > To: <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
> > Cc: <jasowang@redhat.com>, luwenpeng <lwp_1994@163.com>
> >
> >
> > The meaning of the bit flag in ip.frag_off is Don`t fragmented
> > When judging IPv4 is_fragmented according to ip.frag_off,
> > should use !(bpf_ntohs(ip.frag_off) & 0x4000) instead of !!ip.frag_off
> >
> > Signed-off-by: WenPeng Lu <lwp_1994@163.com>
> > ---
> > tools/ebpf/rss.bpf.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/ebpf/rss.bpf.c b/tools/ebpf/rss.bpf.c
> > index 20f227e2ac..e77b764f3d 100644
> > --- a/tools/ebpf/rss.bpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/ebpf/rss.bpf.c
> > @@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static inline int parse_packet(struct __sk_buff *skb,
> >
> > info->in_src = ip.saddr;
> > info->in_dst = ip.daddr;
> > - info->is_fragmented = !!ip.frag_off;
> > + info->is_fragmented = !(bpf_ntohs(ip.frag_off) & 0x4000);
> >
> > l4_protocol = ip.protocol;
> > l4_offset = ip.ihl * 4;
> > --
> > 2.30.1 (Apple Git-130)
> >
> >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-28 12:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-21 8:20 [PATCH] tools/ebpf: Fix IPv4 fragmentation identify luwenpeng
[not found] ` <CAGoVJZx2T6C37UTiaO5xL78vMKweJYyEVZse72t0LNv3-kV3_Q@mail.gmail.com>
2023-04-28 10:58 ` Andrew Melnichenko
2023-04-28 11:55 ` Andrew Melnichenko [this message]
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='CABcq3pHBFPEWO19vyNcqBfwboSJBLLgD_V3VBPRzOCkmb=brEA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=andrew@daynix.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=lwp_1994@163.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=ybendito@redhat.com \
--cc=yvugenfi@redhat.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).