From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
To: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@ovn.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
dev@openvswitch.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
paulb@mellanox.com, Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] act_ct: support asymmetric conntrack
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 19:40:54 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191118224054.GB388551@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f7to8x8yj6k.fsf@dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com>
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 04:21:39PM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
> Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 04:07:14PM -0500, Aaron Conole wrote:
> >> The act_ct TC module shares a common conntrack and NAT infrastructure
> >> exposed via netfilter. It's possible that a packet needs both SNAT and
> >> DNAT manipulation, due to e.g. tuple collision. Netfilter can support
> >> this because it runs through the NAT table twice - once on ingress and
> >> again after egress. The act_ct action doesn't have such capability.
> >>
> >> Like netfilter hook infrastructure, we should run through NAT twice to
> >> keep the symmetry.
> >>
> >> Fixes: b57dc7c13ea9 ("net/sched: Introduce action ct")
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> >> ---
> >> net/sched/act_ct.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/net/sched/act_ct.c b/net/sched/act_ct.c
> >> index fcc46025e790..f3232a00970f 100644
> >> --- a/net/sched/act_ct.c
> >> +++ b/net/sched/act_ct.c
> >> @@ -329,6 +329,7 @@ static int tcf_ct_act_nat(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >> bool commit)
> >> {
> >> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_NAT)
> >> + int err;
> >> enum nf_nat_manip_type maniptype;
> >>
> >> if (!(ct_action & TCA_CT_ACT_NAT))
> >> @@ -359,7 +360,17 @@ static int tcf_ct_act_nat(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >> return NF_ACCEPT;
> >> }
> >>
> >> - return ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
> >> + err = ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
> >> + if (err == NF_ACCEPT &&
> >> + ct->status & IPS_SRC_NAT && ct->status & IPS_DST_NAT) {
> >> + if (maniptype == NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC)
> >> + maniptype = NF_NAT_MANIP_DST;
> >> + else
> >> + maniptype = NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC;
> >> +
> >> + err = ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
> >> + }
> >
> > I keep thinking about this and I'm not entirely convinced that this
> > shouldn't be simpler. More like:
> >
> > if (DNAT)
> > DNAT
> > if (SNAT)
> > SNAT
> >
> > So it always does DNAT before SNAT, similarly to what iptables would
> > do on PRE/POSTROUTING chains.
>
> I can rewrite the whole function, but I wanted to start with the smaller
> fix that worked. I also think it needs more testing then (since it's
> something of a rewrite of the function).
>
> I guess it's not too important - do you think it gives any readability
> to do it this way? If so, I can respin the patch changing it like you
> describe.
I didn't mean a rewrite, but just to never handle SNAT before DNAT. So
the fix here would be like:
- return ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
+ err = ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
+ if (err == NF_ACCEPT && maniptype == NF_NAT_MANIP_DST &&
+ ct->status & IPS_SRC_NAT && ct->status & IPS_DST_NAT) {
+ maniptype = NF_NAT_MANIP_SRC;
+ err = ct_nat_execute(skb, ct, ctinfo, range, maniptype);
+ }
+ return err;
> >> + return err;
> >> #else
> >> return NF_ACCEPT;
> >> #endif
> >> --
> >> 2.21.0
> >>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-18 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-08 21:07 [PATCH net 1/2] openvswitch: support asymmetric conntrack Aaron Conole
2019-11-08 21:07 ` [PATCH net 2/2] act_ct: " Aaron Conole
2019-11-14 14:22 ` Roi Dayan
2019-11-14 14:24 ` Paul Blakey
2019-11-18 21:24 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-14 16:29 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2019-11-18 21:21 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-18 22:40 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner [this message]
2019-11-22 20:39 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-22 20:43 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2019-11-09 22:15 ` [PATCH net 1/2] openvswitch: " Pravin Shelar
2019-11-18 20:39 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-25 15:38 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-26 4:07 ` Pravin Shelar
2019-11-12 8:52 ` Nicolas Dichtel
2019-11-18 21:19 ` Aaron Conole
2019-11-28 8:22 ` Nicolas Dichtel
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=20191118224054.GB388551@localhost.localdomain \
--to=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dev@openvswitch.org \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulb@mellanox.com \
--cc=pshelar@ovn.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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).