From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C610EC5519F for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F24322201 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 00:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="t0GmFoXm" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726136AbgKMAud (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:50:33 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42948 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725929AbgKMAuc (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:50:32 -0500 Received: from mail-oo1-xc42.google.com (mail-oo1-xc42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c42]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77D3FC0613D1; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:50:31 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oo1-xc42.google.com with SMTP id h10so212354ooi.10; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:50:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2DtYk9HZqyEvMEaETEH6zalA/3XhQS1k0ZsPubjYnnk=; b=t0GmFoXmGbiGv+heed+HCO88cXvVm1/t29g3XKiIQIukIb4zdXRVeHR+Lrae5OqHDx qAJw3gJG8ZC5/8C8DrOU9bsiDEkKM9FYVyfHNVPMO8GYELkL5BfPP+dLMyYIvL4/n6B4 7ThEO1cmNq5i7MZF/VdKyNp9bFsXj1EDlqtQMv9leH46OsyQPdWA+438jQ8XbPdQdy7U w7Xsr1laomxfEgaSCs8M713mLQZ7nGnfAXLqxZR3LRIyf9vRkdWzSy2Obw2Q9NCfT5v0 z27AEKoYq+/ctHEl1DY/UKT4K4B2+PwWY5kbwvyN5Q/ecESWExRoYMUnXqhkL1PPqkxD zQLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2DtYk9HZqyEvMEaETEH6zalA/3XhQS1k0ZsPubjYnnk=; b=rBDsdZjEkCuOitkwxuvPC5Ut593rG8YCm27yKZY2eAT1sQdFhzuyJm+tGnTPZJAbt5 BrDzuUl2Y7LczLi5biKzcD8LnP/uD0FMtaAxL6h2Pt3/lKblzvzZCMF+TXnluBjHr6Q/ wxWxt4DEc6qD3S1ZN2l7lbZlGXIBxt74rHsq1ecp9I93uxoeOwzFTJHrvdLM2JGDkIDJ m8GHRBdJd4ZdrZ7wyRIu2nstX62vyGAqig49mnx4XOkxgSSu2LLoea9fdHGdw3hBxDKg 9CD4piVvnwogYNi+Nr6J9Vpl8NhleJyxy1Zp0a7WN0K7ull9ND/HVluaELBrAqxRZad7 PI0g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304HPaku2HyookJqxou+Ea69HUjdCYWin0kTkr2OJXijRa6saPR 0sMqunRBmhi7+yJbEkKuKJk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvLtc0JIfn+lIFP0Z8u7PxKexvUTiavin7UTOHeCIdojS/tl8aT4k23PgJdP+bCgDcO4MFjQ== X-Received: by 2002:a4a:1e43:: with SMTP id 64mr1440265ooq.57.1605228630945; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:50:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([184.63.162.180]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 85sm1530668oie.30.2020.11.12.16.50.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:50:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:50:23 -0800 From: John Fastabend To: Jakub Sitnicki , Daniel Borkmann , Santucci Pierpaolo Cc: Andrii Nakryiko , Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Martin Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , Andrii Nakryiko , john fastabend , KP Singh , Networking , bpf , sdf@google.com Message-ID: <5fadd84fc74e4_27844208d0@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <87h7pvvtk9.fsf@cloudflare.com> References: <87imacw3bh.fsf@cloudflare.com> <292adb9d-899a-fcb0-a37f-cd21e848fede@iogearbox.net> <87h7pvvtk9.fsf@cloudflare.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftest/bpf: fix IPV6FR handling in flow dissector Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Jakub Sitnicki wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 12:06 AM CET, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > > [...] > > >>> I'm not initimately familiar with this test, but looking at the change > >>> I'd consider that Destinations Options and encapsulation headers can > >>> follow the Fragment Header. > >>> > >>> With enough of Dst Opts or levels of encapsulation, transport header > >>> could be pushed to the 2nd fragment. So I'm not sure if the assertion > >>> from the IPv4 dissector that 2nd fragment and following doesn't contain > >>> any parseable header holds. > > > > Hm, staring at rfc8200, it says that the first fragment packet must include > > the upper-layer header (e.g. tcp, udp). The patch here should probably add a > > comment wrt to the rfc. > > You're right, it clearly says so. Nevermind my worries about malformed > packets then. Change LGTM: > > Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki Also please add some of the details discussed here to the commit msg so we can remember this next time. Thanks!