[PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

At the moment, macvtap crashes are observed if macvtap is attached
to an interface with LRO enabled.
The crash in question is BUG() in macvtap_skb_to_vnet_hdr.
This happens because several drivers set gso_size but not gso_type
in incoming skbs.
The following patches fix this for
Additionally, cbf1de72324a8105ddcc3d9ce9acbc613faea17e is required
to fix this for broadcom - would it make sense to cherry-pick
this patch into 3.8?

I tested that the patch fixes the crash for ixgbe but
don't have qlogic hardware to fix.  I also only tested TCP.

Feedback wellcome.

Michael S. Tsirkin (2):
  ixgbe: fix gso type
  qlcnic: set gso_type

 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c  | 8 ++++++--
 drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c | 7 ++++++-
 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
MST

[PATCH 1/2] ixgbe: fix gso type

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

ixgbe set gso_size but not gso_type. This leads to
crashes in macvtap.

Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
---

I tested that this fixes the crash for me.  I am told on ixgbe LRO only
triggers with TCP so checking protocol should be enough?

 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
index 396e280..9d01673 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
@@ -1399,6 +1399,10 @@ static void ixgbe_set_rsc_gso_size(struct ixgbe_ring *ring,
 	/* set gso_size to avoid messing up TCP MSS */
 	skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = DIV_ROUND_UP((skb->len - hdr_len),
 						 IXGBE_CB(skb)->append_cnt);
+	if (skb->protocol == ETH_P_IPV6)
+		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
+	else
+		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV4;
 }
 
 static void ixgbe_update_rsc_stats(struct ixgbe_ring *rx_ring,
@@ -1433,6 +1437,8 @@ static void ixgbe_process_skb_fields(struct ixgbe_ring *rx_ring,
 {
 	struct net_device *dev = rx_ring->netdev;
 
+	skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
+
 	ixgbe_update_rsc_stats(rx_ring, skb);
 
 	ixgbe_rx_hash(rx_ring, rx_desc, skb);
@@ -1448,8 +1454,6 @@ static void ixgbe_process_skb_fields(struct ixgbe_ring *rx_ring,
 	}
 
 	skb_record_rx_queue(skb, rx_ring->queue_index);
-
-	skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
 }
 
 static void ixgbe_rx_skb(struct ixgbe_q_vector *q_vector,
-- 
MST

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ixgbe: fix gso type

[Eric Dumazet]

On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 01:02 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> ixgbe set gso_size but not gso_type. This leads to
> crashes in macvtap.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> I tested that this fixes the crash for me.  I am told on ixgbe LRO only
> triggers with TCP so checking protocol should be enough?
> 
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> index 396e280..9d01673 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> @@ -1399,6 +1399,10 @@ static void ixgbe_set_rsc_gso_size(struct ixgbe_ring *ring,
>  	/* set gso_size to avoid messing up TCP MSS */
>  	skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = DIV_ROUND_UP((skb->len - hdr_len),
>  						 IXGBE_CB(skb)->append_cnt);
> +	if (skb->protocol == ETH_P_IPV6)

Same problem here (skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6))

> +		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
> +	else
> +		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV4;
>  }
>  

[PATCH 2/2] qlcnic: set gso_type

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

qlcnic set gso_size but not gso type. This leads to crashes
in macvtap.

Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
---
This one I only compiled - don't have qlogic hardware.

 drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c | 7 ++++++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
index bb4311e..370049c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
@@ -1043,8 +1043,13 @@ qlcnic_process_lro(struct qlcnic_adapter *adapter,
 	th->seq = htonl(seq_number);
 	length = skb->len;
 
-	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP)
+	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP) {
 		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = qlcnic_get_lro_sts_mss(sts_data1);
+		if (skb->protocol == ETH_P_IPV6)
+			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
+		else
+			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV4;
+	}
 
 	if (vid != 0xffff)
 		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, vid);
-- 
MST

Re: [PATCH 2/2] qlcnic: set gso_type

[Eric Dumazet]

On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 01:02 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> qlcnic set gso_size but not gso type. This leads to crashes
> in macvtap.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
> This one I only compiled - don't have qlogic hardware.
> 
>  drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> index bb4311e..370049c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> @@ -1043,8 +1043,13 @@ qlcnic_process_lro(struct qlcnic_adapter *adapter,
>  	th->seq = htonl(seq_number);
>  	length = skb->len;
>  
> -	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP)
> +	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP) {
>  		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = qlcnic_get_lro_sts_mss(sts_data1);
> +		if (skb->protocol == ETH_P_IPV6)

Are you sure its not skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6) ?

> +			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
> +		else
> +			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV4;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (vid != 0xffff)
>  		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, vid);

Re: [PATCH 2/2] qlcnic: set gso_type

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 07:20:37PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 01:02 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > qlcnic set gso_size but not gso type. This leads to crashes
> > in macvtap.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > This one I only compiled - don't have qlogic hardware.
> > 
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c | 7 ++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> > index bb4311e..370049c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qlcnic/qlcnic_io.c
> > @@ -1043,8 +1043,13 @@ qlcnic_process_lro(struct qlcnic_adapter *adapter,
> >  	th->seq = htonl(seq_number);
> >  	length = skb->len;
> >  
> > -	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP)
> > +	if (adapter->flags & QLCNIC_FW_LRO_MSS_CAP) {
> >  		skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size = qlcnic_get_lro_sts_mss(sts_data1);
> > +		if (skb->protocol == ETH_P_IPV6)
> 
> Are you sure its not skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_IPV6) ?

Um, so it is. It just happens to work correctly for ipv4 :)
I'll respin.

> > +			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
> > +		else
> > +			skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV4;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	if (vid != 0xffff)
> >  		__vlan_hwaccel_put_tag(skb, vid);
> 

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Ben Hutchings]

On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 01:02 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> At the moment, macvtap crashes are observed if macvtap is attached
> to an interface with LRO enabled.
> The crash in question is BUG() in macvtap_skb_to_vnet_hdr.
> This happens because several drivers set gso_size but not gso_type
> in incoming skbs.
> The following patches fix this for
> Additionally, cbf1de72324a8105ddcc3d9ce9acbc613faea17e is required
> to fix this for broadcom - would it make sense to cherry-pick
> this patch into 3.8?
> 
> I tested that the patch fixes the crash for ixgbe but
> don't have qlogic hardware to fix.  I also only tested TCP.
> 
> Feedback wellcome.

If we want to allow forwarding from LRO then net/ipv4/inet_lro.c also
needs to set gso_type.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Eric Dumazet]

On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 23:34 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> If we want to allow forwarding from LRO then net/ipv4/inet_lro.c also
> needs to set gso_type.

Then, what is dev_disable_lro() purpose ?

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Ben Hutchings]

On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 19:18 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 23:34 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 
> > If we want to allow forwarding from LRO then net/ipv4/inet_lro.c also
> > needs to set gso_type.
> 
> Then, what is dev_disable_lro() purpose ?

The purpose was to disable LRO when forwarding because they weren't
compatible.

If the consensus now is that the modifications made by LRO+TSO are
acceptable in a bridge/router, then we should get rid of
dev_disable_lro() and set both gso_size & gso_type on all LRO receive
paths.

If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.  (Also, we really ought
to keep a count of the number of forwarders and use that in
netdev_fix_features(), rather than doing a one-time disable.)

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[David Miller]

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000

> If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.

I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> 
> > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> 
> I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.

But we don't need to preserve the packets when passing them to macvtap
(which discards all this info smashing the packet into a single buffer anyway),
correct?
If true LRO with macvtap might be useful and so the patchset is probably
still the right thing to do to fix the macvtap crash. Makes sense?

We might want to add code to forward LRO status from macvlan
(not macvtap) back to the lowerdev, so that setting up forwarding
from macvlan disables LRO on the lowerdev, but that seems like another
issue.

-- 
MST

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Ben Hutchings]

On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 23:33 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> > 
> > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> > 
> > I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.
> 
> But we don't need to preserve the packets when passing them to macvtap
> (which discards all this info smashing the packet into a single buffer anyway),
> correct?

macvtap_skb_to_vnet_hdr() certainly seems to be trying to preserve all
the packet information.

> If true LRO with macvtap might be useful and so the patchset is probably
> still the right thing to do to fix the macvtap crash. Makes sense?

If macvtap+virtio_net is expected to re-segment then this is fine.  But
I don't see why it should be different from other uses of macvlan.

> We might want to add code to forward LRO status from macvlan
> (not macvtap) back to the lowerdev, so that setting up forwarding
> from macvlan disables LRO on the lowerdev, but that seems like another
> issue.

I think it's the same issue!

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[David Miller]

From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:31:35 +0000

> On Thu, 2013-02-07 at 23:33 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> We might want to add code to forward LRO status from macvlan
>> (not macvtap) back to the lowerdev, so that setting up forwarding
>> from macvlan disables LRO on the lowerdev, but that seems like another
>> issue.
> 
> I think it's the same issue!

I do too, can someome please work to resolve this properly?

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> 
> > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> 
> I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.

With virtio we are getting packets from a linux host,
so we could thinkably preserve packets exactly
even with LRO. I am guessing other hardware could be
doing this as well.

I am not sure what information would need to be preserved -
could someone help clarify please?

-- 
MST

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Ben Hutchings]

On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> > 
> > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> > 
> > I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.
> 
> With virtio we are getting packets from a linux host,
> so we could thinkably preserve packets exactly
> even with LRO. I am guessing other hardware could be
> doing this as well.
> 
> I am not sure what information would need to be preserved -
> could someone help clarify please?

Some LRO implementations may not preserve:

- Packet boundaries
  - TSO/GSO produces packets all the same size, except possibly for the
    last one.  GRO therefore flushes a flow after merging a packet with
    a different segment size.
- IPv4 TTL, IPv6 hop-limit, TCP timestamp
  - TSO/GSO will put the same values in all packets.  GRO flushes a flow
    if they change.
- IPv4 fragment ID
  - TSO/GSO produces consecutive fragment IDs.  GRO flushes a flow
    if it sees a non-consecutive fragment ID.
- MAC header, IPv4 TOS, IPv6 traffic class
  - Should be the same for all packets in a flow.  GRO actually checks
    and flushes a flow if they change.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> > > 
> > > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> > > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> > > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> > > 
> > > I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.
> > 
> > With virtio we are getting packets from a linux host,
> > so we could thinkably preserve packets exactly
> > even with LRO. I am guessing other hardware could be
> > doing this as well.
> > 
> > I am not sure what information would need to be preserved -
> > could someone help clarify please?
> 
> Some LRO implementations may not preserve:
> 
> - Packet boundaries
>   - TSO/GSO produces packets all the same size, except possibly for the
>     last one.  GRO therefore flushes a flow after merging a packet with
>     a different segment size.
> - IPv4 TTL, IPv6 hop-limit, TCP timestamp
>   - TSO/GSO will put the same values in all packets.  GRO flushes a flow
>     if they change.
> - IPv4 fragment ID
>   - TSO/GSO produces consecutive fragment IDs.  GRO flushes a flow
>     if it sees a non-consecutive fragment ID.
> - MAC header, IPv4 TOS, IPv6 traffic class
>   - Should be the same for all packets in a flow.  GRO actually checks
>     and flushes a flow if they change.
> 
> Ben.

Thanks!

Okay so since LRO in virtio is actually running on top
of GRO/TSO in linux, looks like the only things worth preserving
that we don't preserve at the moment are the packet
boundaries, for which it's enough to report
the first segment size to guest - we have the total length,
from that we can calculate the last segment size.

> -- 
> Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
> Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
> They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Rusty Russell]

"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
>> > > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
>> > > 
>> > > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
>> > > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
>> > > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
>> > > 
>> > > I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.
>> > 
>> > With virtio we are getting packets from a linux host,
>> > so we could thinkably preserve packets exactly
>> > even with LRO. I am guessing other hardware could be
>> > doing this as well.
>> > 
>> > I am not sure what information would need to be preserved -
>> > could someone help clarify please?
>> 
>> Some LRO implementations may not preserve:
>> 
>> - Packet boundaries
>>   - TSO/GSO produces packets all the same size, except possibly for the
>>     last one.  GRO therefore flushes a flow after merging a packet with
>>     a different segment size.
>> - IPv4 TTL, IPv6 hop-limit, TCP timestamp
>>   - TSO/GSO will put the same values in all packets.  GRO flushes a flow
>>     if they change.
>> - IPv4 fragment ID
>>   - TSO/GSO produces consecutive fragment IDs.  GRO flushes a flow
>>     if it sees a non-consecutive fragment ID.
>> - MAC header, IPv4 TOS, IPv6 traffic class
>>   - Should be the same for all packets in a flow.  GRO actually checks
>>     and flushes a flow if they change.
>> 
>> Ben.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Okay so since LRO in virtio is actually running on top
> of GRO/TSO in linux, looks like the only things worth preserving
> that we don't preserve at the moment are the packet
> boundaries, for which it's enough to report
> the first segment size to guest - we have the total length,
> from that we can calculate the last segment size.

Isn't this reflected in virtio_net_hdr->gso_size?

But the bigger point here is that we shouldn't be feeding guests LRO
packets which don't meet the stricter GRO requirements, as we don't know
what the guest is doing with them.  It might be forwarding them itself.

I thought LRO was deprecated and GRO was the new hotness, but I haven't
been following.  Do we still care about LRO?

Cheers,
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Ben Hutchings]

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 11:05 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> writes:
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 03:56:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2013-06-10 at 10:07 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 01:14:20PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> >> > > From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
> >> > > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 16:20:46 +0000
> >> > > 
> >> > > > If the consensus is still that we must preserve packets exactly (aside
> >> > > > from the usual modifications by IP routers) then LRO should be disabled
> >> > > > on all devices for which forwarding is enabled.
> >> > > 
> >> > > I believe this is still undoubtedly the consensus.
> >> > 
> >> > With virtio we are getting packets from a linux host,
> >> > so we could thinkably preserve packets exactly
> >> > even with LRO. I am guessing other hardware could be
> >> > doing this as well.
> >> > 
> >> > I am not sure what information would need to be preserved -
> >> > could someone help clarify please?
> >> 
> >> Some LRO implementations may not preserve:
> >> 
> >> - Packet boundaries
> >>   - TSO/GSO produces packets all the same size, except possibly for the
> >>     last one.  GRO therefore flushes a flow after merging a packet with
> >>     a different segment size.
> >> - IPv4 TTL, IPv6 hop-limit, TCP timestamp
> >>   - TSO/GSO will put the same values in all packets.  GRO flushes a flow
> >>     if they change.
> >> - IPv4 fragment ID
> >>   - TSO/GSO produces consecutive fragment IDs.  GRO flushes a flow
> >>     if it sees a non-consecutive fragment ID.
> >> - MAC header, IPv4 TOS, IPv6 traffic class
> >>   - Should be the same for all packets in a flow.  GRO actually checks
> >>     and flushes a flow if they change.
> >> 
> >> Ben.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Okay so since LRO in virtio is actually running on top
> > of GRO/TSO in linux, looks like the only things worth preserving
> > that we don't preserve at the moment are the packet
> > boundaries, for which it's enough to report
> > the first segment size to guest - we have the total length,
> > from that we can calculate the last segment size.
> 
> Isn't this reflected in virtio_net_hdr->gso_size?
> 
> But the bigger point here is that we shouldn't be feeding guests LRO
> packets which don't meet the stricter GRO requirements, as we don't know
> what the guest is doing with them.  It might be forwarding them itself.
> 
> I thought LRO was deprecated and GRO was the new hotness, but I haven't
> been following.  Do we still care about LRO?

The old software LRO implementation, inet_lro, is deprecated in favour
of GRO and is now only used by one or two drivers.  Hardware/firmware
implementations of LRO are still in use and not deprecated, but we try
to disable them on devices for which forwarding is enabled because of
this information loss.

The problem I was talking about is this: you can put macvlan on top of a
device that has LRO enabled, and then if the macvtap/macvlan device is
used for forwarding the output packets might not look the same as those
originally received.  So LRO should be disabled on the underlying device
whenever forwarding is enabled on the macvtap/macvlan device; however we
can't necessarily tell when that happens as the forwarding might be done
inside a VM.  Maybe this is just too obscure a use case to worry much
about getting it right automatically.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Rusty Russell]

Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> writes:
> On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 11:05 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> I thought LRO was deprecated and GRO was the new hotness, but I haven't
>> been following.  Do we still care about LRO?
>
> The old software LRO implementation, inet_lro, is deprecated in favour
> of GRO and is now only used by one or two drivers.  Hardware/firmware
> implementations of LRO are still in use and not deprecated, but we try
> to disable them on devices for which forwarding is enabled because of
> this information loss.

Right, thanks for the clarification.

Hardware implementations of LRO which can't meet GRO rules are only
semi-useful, and that should be fed back to vendors.  Hard.

> The problem I was talking about is this: you can put macvlan on top of a
> device that has LRO enabled, and then if the macvtap/macvlan device is
> used for forwarding the output packets might not look the same as those
> originally received.  So LRO should be disabled on the underlying device
> whenever forwarding is enabled on the macvtap/macvlan device; however we
> can't necessarily tell when that happens as the forwarding might be done
> inside a VM.  Maybe this is just too obscure a use case to worry much
> about getting it right automatically.

The VM needs to tell us it's OK with such mangling, otherwise we
shouldn't do it (at least by default).  The same way we'd be annoyed if
a card rev started doing LRO without the driver explicitly enabling it.

Cheers,
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Cong Wang]

On 02/07/2013 07:02 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> At the moment, macvtap crashes are observed if macvtap is attached
> to an interface with LRO enabled.
> The crash in question is BUG() in macvtap_skb_to_vnet_hdr.
> This happens because several drivers set gso_size but not gso_type
> in incoming skbs.
> The following patches fix this for
> Additionally, cbf1de72324a8105ddcc3d9ce9acbc613faea17e is required
> to fix this for broadcom - would it make sense to cherry-pick
> this patch into 3.8?


Doesn't macvtap need to call skb_warn_if_lro() too like bridge and 
openvswitch? Something like...

diff --git a/drivers/net/macvtap.c b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
index b181dfb..b2c6227 100644
--- a/drivers/net/macvtap.c
+++ b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
@@ -253,6 +253,9 @@ static int macvtap_forward(struct net_device *dev, 
struct sk_buff *skb)
         if (!q)
                 goto drop;

+       if (unlikely(skb_warn_if_lro(skb)))
+               goto drop;
+
         if (skb_queue_len(&q->sk.sk_receive_queue) >= dev->tx_queue_len)
                 goto drop;


I am not saying these drivers don't need to fix, I am just saying if we 
need to fix LRO case.

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix kernel crash with macvtap on top of LRO

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:25:13AM +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> On 02/07/2013 07:02 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >At the moment, macvtap crashes are observed if macvtap is attached
> >to an interface with LRO enabled.
> >The crash in question is BUG() in macvtap_skb_to_vnet_hdr.
> >This happens because several drivers set gso_size but not gso_type
> >in incoming skbs.
> >The following patches fix this for
> >Additionally, cbf1de72324a8105ddcc3d9ce9acbc613faea17e is required
> >to fix this for broadcom - would it make sense to cherry-pick
> >this patch into 3.8?
> 
> 
> Doesn't macvtap need to call skb_warn_if_lro() too like bridge and
> openvswitch? Something like...

This is what Ben proposed a year ago
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/221695
but apparently people really want LRO to work with macvtap.

> diff --git a/drivers/net/macvtap.c b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> index b181dfb..b2c6227 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> @@ -253,6 +253,9 @@ static int macvtap_forward(struct net_device
> *dev, struct sk_buff *skb)
>         if (!q)
>                 goto drop;
> 
> +       if (unlikely(skb_warn_if_lro(skb)))
> +               goto drop;
> +
>         if (skb_queue_len(&q->sk.sk_receive_queue) >= dev->tx_queue_len)
>                 goto drop;
> 
> 
> I am not saying these drivers don't need to fix, I am just saying if
> we need to fix LRO case.
> 
> Thanks.