From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: sunilmut@microsoft.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, decui@microsoft.com,
sthemmin@microsoft.com, sashal@kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net]: hv_sock: Remove the accept port restriction
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 11:51:27 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200114.115127.2012708883911771822.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SN4PR2101MB08808AAFCEB4E8FC178A4B79C0340@SN4PR2101MB0880.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
From: Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 00:52:14 +0000
> Currently, hv_sock restricts the port the guest socket can accept
> connections on. hv_sock divides the socket port namespace into two parts
> for server side (listening socket), 0-0x7FFFFFFF & 0x80000000-0xFFFFFFFF
> (there are no restrictions on client port namespace). The first part
> (0-0x7FFFFFFF) is reserved for sockets where connections can be accepted.
> The second part (0x80000000-0xFFFFFFFF) is reserved for allocating ports
> for the peer (host) socket, once a connection is accepted.
> This reservation of the port namespace is specific to hv_sock and not
> known by the generic vsock library (ex: af_vsock). This is problematic
> because auto-binds/ephemeral ports are handled by the generic vsock
> library and it has no knowledge of this port reservation and could
> allocate a port that is not compatible with hv_sock (and legitimately so).
> The issue hasn't surfaced so far because the auto-bind code of vsock
> (__vsock_bind_stream) prior to the change 'VSOCK: bind to random port for
> VMADDR_PORT_ANY' would start walking up from LAST_RESERVED_PORT (1023) and
> start assigning ports. That will take a large number of iterations to hit
> 0x7FFFFFFF. But, after the above change to randomize port selection, the
> issue has started coming up more frequently.
> There has really been no good reason to have this port reservation logic
> in hv_sock from the get go. Reserving a local port for peer ports is not
> how things are handled generally. Peer ports should reflect the peer port.
> This fixes the issue by lifting the port reservation, and also returns the
> right peer port. Since the code converts the GUID to the peer port (by
> using the first 4 bytes), there is a possibility of conflicts, but that
> seems like a reasonable risk to take, given this is limited to vsock and
> that only applies to all local sockets.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut@microsoft.com>
Applied.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-15 12:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-14 0:52 [PATCH net]: hv_sock: Remove the accept port restriction Sunil Muthuswamy
2020-01-14 19:51 ` David Miller [this message]
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=20200114.115127.2012708883911771822.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=decui@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=sthemmin@microsoft.com \
--cc=sunilmut@microsoft.com \
/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).