From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
To: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Cc: passt-dev@passt.top
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tap: Explicitly drop IPv4 fragments, and give a warning
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2023 13:21:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230704132104.48106368@elisabeth> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230704043623.1143288-1-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 14:36:23 +1000
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> We don't handle defragmentation of IP packets coming from the tap side,
> and we're unlikely to any time soon (with our large MTU, it's not useful
> for practical use cases). Currently, however, we simply ignore the
> fragmentation flags and treat fragments as though they were whole IP
> packets. This isn't ideal and can lead to rather cryptic behaviour if we
> do receive IP fragments.
>
> Change the code to explicitly drop fragmented packets, and print a rate
> limited warning if we do encounter them.
>
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=62
By the way, I silently replaced those with "Link:" in the past, just in
case we want to automate something around it one day, to avoid
differences between references to different bug trackers.
Once upon a time, I wrote some scripting to automatically link HTML
reports with (Linux kernel) commits to bug trackers, and it was quite
painful to discover all possible spellings of "Bugzilla" plus a few
others, hence my thought. But let me know if something speaks against
this.
> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> ---
> tap.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c
> index e3235299..2e6939fa 100644
> --- a/tap.c
> +++ b/tap.c
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static PACKET_POOL_NOINIT(pool_tap4, TAP_MSGS, pkt_buf);
> static PACKET_POOL_NOINIT(pool_tap6, TAP_MSGS, pkt_buf);
>
> #define TAP_SEQS 128 /* Different L4 tuples in one batch */
> +#define FRAGMENT_MSG_RATE 10 /* # seconds between fragment warnings */
>
> /**
> * tap_send() - Send frame, with qemu socket header if needed
> @@ -543,6 +544,32 @@ static void tap_packet_debug(const struct iphdr *iph,
> }
> }
>
> +/**
> + * tap4_is_fragment() - Determine if a packet is an IP fragment
This is actually independent from the "tap" "side", it could also be
e.g. ipv4_is_fragment(), in util.c. Not a strong preference though, I
guess we can also merge it as it is.
> + * @iph: IPv4 header (length already validated)
> + * @now: Current timestamp
> + *
> + * Return: true if iph is an IP fragment, false otherwise
> + */
> +static bool tap4_is_fragment(const struct iphdr *iph,
> + const struct timespec *now)
> +{
> + if (iph->frag_off & ~IP_DF) {
> + /* Ratelimit messages */
> + static time_t last_message;
> + static unsigned num_dropped;
> +
> + num_dropped++;
> + if (now->tv_sec - last_message > FRAGMENT_MSG_RATE) {
> + warn("Can't process IPv4 fragments (%lu dropped)", num_dropped);
> + last_message = now->tv_sec;
> + num_dropped = 0;
> + }
> + return true;
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * tap4_handler() - IPv4 and ARP packet handler for tap file descriptor
> * @c: Execution context
> @@ -591,6 +618,10 @@ resume:
> hlen > l3_len)
> continue;
>
> + /* We don't handle IP fragments, drop them */
> + if (tap4_is_fragment(iph, now))
> + continue;
> +
> l4_len = l3_len - hlen;
>
> if (iph->saddr && c->ip4.addr_seen.s_addr != iph->saddr) {
--
Stefano
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-04 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-04 4:36 [PATCH] tap: Explicitly drop IPv4 fragments, and give a warning David Gibson
2023-07-04 11:21 ` Stefano Brivio [this message]
2023-07-05 1:04 ` David Gibson
2023-07-05 4:20 ` David Gibson
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=20230704132104.48106368@elisabeth \
--to=sbrivio@redhat.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
/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.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://passt.top/passt
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 IMAP folder(s).