From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@iogearbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
maze@google.com, lmb@cloudflare.com, shaun@tigera.io,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
marek@cloudflare.com, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
eyal.birger@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V3 0/6] bpf: New approach for BPF MTU handling
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2020 13:49:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5f80ccca63d9_ed74208f8@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201009093319.6140b322@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2020 16:08:57 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > V3: Drop enforcement of MTU in net-core, leave it to drivers
>
> Sorry for being late to the discussion.
>
> I absolutely disagree. We had cases in the past where HW would lock up
> if it was sent a frame with bad geometry.
>
> We will not be sprinkling validation checks across the drivers because
> some reconfiguration path may occasionally yield a bad packet, or it's
> hard to do something right with BPF.
This is a driver bug then. As it stands today drivers may get hit with
skb with MTU greater than set MTU as best I can tell. Generally I
expect drivers use MTU to configure RX buffers not sure how it is going
to be used on TX side? Any examples? I just poked around through the
driver source to see and seems to confirm its primarily for RX side
configuration with some drivers throwing the event down to the firmware
for something that I can't see in the code?
I'm not suggestiong sprinkling validation checks across the drivers.
I'm suggesting if the drivers hang we fix them.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-09 20:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-08 14:08 [PATCH bpf-next V3 0/6] bpf: New approach for BPF MTU handling Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 1/6] bpf: Remove MTU check in __bpf_skb_max_len Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 16:12 ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-10-09 18:26 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-10 10:25 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 2/6] bpf: bpf_fib_lookup return MTU value as output when looked up Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 4:05 ` David Ahern
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 3/6] bpf: add BPF-helper for MTU checking Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 23:29 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-21 11:32 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-12 15:54 ` Lorenz Bauer
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 4/6] bpf: make it possible to identify BPF redirected SKBs Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 16:47 ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-10-09 18:33 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-10 11:09 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-12 21:04 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 5/6] bpf: drop MTU check when doing TC-BPF redirect to ingress Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 23:17 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-08 14:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 6/6] net: inline and splitup is_skb_forwardable Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-09 16:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next V3 0/6] bpf: New approach for BPF MTU handling Jakub Kicinski
2020-10-09 20:49 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2020-10-09 21:07 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-10-09 21:57 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2020-10-09 23:00 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-10-10 10:44 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-10 16:32 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-10-10 23:52 ` John Fastabend
2020-10-11 23:30 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-10-13 20:40 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-13 23:07 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-10-13 23:37 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-10-13 23:54 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
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=5f80ccca63d9_ed74208f8@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch \
--to=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=borkmann@iogearbox.net \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=eyal.birger@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lmb@cloudflare.com \
--cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=marek@cloudflare.com \
--cc=maze@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaun@tigera.io \
/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).