Re: Bug: ip utility fails to show routes with large # of multipath next-hops
From: David Ahern <hidden>
Date: 2020-07-29 15:17:56
On 7/29/20 5:43 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 05:52:44PM -0700, Ashutosh Grewal wrote:quoted
Hello David and all, I hope this is the correct way to report a bug.Surequoted
I observed this problem with 256 v4 next-hops or 128 v6 next-hops (or 128 or so # of v4 next-hops with labels). Here is an example - root@a6be8c892bb7:/# ip route show 2.2.2.2 Error: Buffer too small for object. Dump terminated Kernel details (though I recall running into the same problem on 4.4* kernel as well) - root@ubuntu-vm:/# uname -a Linux ch1 5.4.0-33-generic #37-Ubuntu SMP Thu May 21 12:53:59 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux I think the problem may be to do with the size of the skbuf being allocated as part of servicing the netlink request. static int netlink_dump(struct sock *sk) { <snip> skb = alloc_skb(...)Yes, I believe you are correct. You will get an skb of size 4K and it can't fit the entire RTA_MULTIPATH attribute with all the nested nexthops. Since it's a single attribute it cannot be split across multiple messages.
yep, well known problem.
Looking at the code, I think a similar problem was already encountered
with IFLA_VFINFO_LIST. See commit c7ac8679bec9 ("rtnetlink: Compute and
store minimum ifinfo dump size").
Maybe we can track the maximum number of IPv4/IPv6 nexthops during
insertion and then consult it to adjust 'min_dump_alloc' for
RTM_GETROUTE.That seems better than the current design for GETLINK which walks all devices to determine max dump size. Not sure how you will track that efficiently though - add is easy, delete is not.
It's a bit complicated for IPv6 because you can append nexthops, but I believe anyone using so many nexthops is already using RTA_MULTIPATH to insert them, so we can simplify.
I hope so.
David, what do you think? You have a better / simpler idea? Maybe one day everyone will be using the new nexthop API and this won't be needed :)
exactly. You won't have this problem with separate nexthops since each one is small (< 4k) and the group (multipath) is a set of ids, not the full set of attributes.