Re: !
flat view
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-03-24 22:47:27
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:51 AM Paolo Abeni [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, 2021-03-23 at 21:54 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:quoted
quoted
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.