netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>
To: Boris Pismenny <borisp@mellanox.com>, Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>
Cc: Aviad Yehezkel <aviadye@mellanox.com>,
	"john.fastabend@gmail.com" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	"daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@mellanox.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 4/4] tls: Fix tls_device receive
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:28:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB7PR04MB42520668CB469E08C3D925CE8B740@DB7PR04MB4252.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e35a912b-7f09-92f9-8f3c-bbf0def3eae0@mellanox.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boris Pismenny <borisp@mellanox.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 8:54 PM
> To: Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>; Dave Watson
> <davejwatson@fb.com>
> Cc: Aviad Yehezkel <aviadye@mellanox.com>; john.fastabend@gmail.com;
> daniel@iogearbox.net; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Eran Ben Elisha
> <eranbe@mellanox.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 4/4] tls: Fix tls_device receive
> 
> 
> 
> On 2/27/2019 5:08 AM, Vakul Garg wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 2:05 AM
> >> To: Boris Pismenny <borisp@mellanox.com>
> >> Cc: aviadye@mellanox.com; john.fastabend@gmail.com;
> >> daniel@iogearbox.net; Vakul Garg <vakul.garg@nxp.com>;
> >> netdev@vger.kernel.org; eranbe@mellanox.com
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 4/4] tls: Fix tls_device receive
> >>
> >> On 02/26/19 02:12 PM, Boris Pismenny wrote:
> >>> Currently, the receive function fails to handle records already
> >>> decrypted by the device due to the commit mentioned below.
> >>>
> >>> This commit advances the TLS record sequence number and prepares the
> >>> context to handle the next record.
> >>>
> >>> Fixes: fedf201e1296 ("net: tls: Refactor control message handling on
> >>> recv")
> >>> Signed-off-by: Boris Pismenny <borisp@mellanox.com>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@mellanox.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>   net/tls/tls_sw.c | 15 +++++++--------
> >>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c index
> >>> f515cd7e984e..85da10182d8d 100644
> >>> --- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> >>> +++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> >>> @@ -1481,18 +1481,17 @@ static int decrypt_skb_update(struct sock
> >>> *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >>>
> >>>   			return err;
> >>>   		}
> >>> -
> >>> -		rxm->full_len -= padding_length(ctx, tls_ctx, skb);
> >>> -
> >>> -		rxm->offset += prot->prepend_size;
> >>> -		rxm->full_len -= prot->overhead_size;
> >>> -		tls_advance_record_sn(sk, &tls_ctx->rx, version);
> >>> -		ctx->decrypted = true;
> >>> -		ctx->saved_data_ready(sk);
> >>>   	} else {
> >>>   		*zc = false;
> >>>   	}
> >>>
> >>> +	rxm->full_len -= padding_length(ctx, tls_ctx, skb);
> >>> +	rxm->offset += prot->prepend_size;
> >>> +	rxm->full_len -= prot->overhead_size;
> >>> +	tls_advance_record_sn(sk, &tls_ctx->rx, version);
> >>> +	ctx->decrypted = true;
> >>> +	ctx->saved_data_ready(sk);
> >>> +
> >>>   	return err;
> >>>   }
> >>
> >> This breaks the tls.control_msg test:
> >>
> >>    [ RUN      ] tls.control_msg
> >>    tls.c:764:tls.control_msg:Expected memcmp(buf, test_str, send_len)
> >> (18446744073709551614) == 0 (0)
> >>    tls.c:777:tls.control_msg:Expected memcmp(buf, test_str, send_len)
> >> (18446744073709551614) == 0 (0)
> >>    tls.control_msg: Test failed at step #8
> >>
> >> So either control message handling needs to only call
> >> decrypt_skb_update once, or we need a new flag or something to handle
> >> the device case
> >
> > I prefer to remove variable 'decrypted' in context.
> > This is no longer required as we already have an rx_list in context for
> storing decrypted records.
> > So for any record which we decrypted but did not return to user space
> > (e.g. for the case when user used recv() and it lead to decryption of
> > non-data record), we should it in rx_list.
> >
> 
> IMO this is inappropriate here, because packets decrypted by tls_device are
> ready to be received, and there is no reason to bounce them through the
> rx_list.

My point was about preventing tls_sw_recvmsg() from calling decrypt_skb_update()
with an already decrypted record. The test case failed because an already decrypted record
got dequeued and passed to decrypt_skb_update() from tls_sw_recvmsg().
For packets decrypted by device, a check using skb->decrypted should be enough.

For now, I think your patch is ok.
I can submit a simplification patch for removing 'decrypted' from tls context later.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-27 16:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-26 12:12 [PATCH net 0/4] tls: Fix issues in tls_device Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 12:12 ` [PATCH net 1/4] tls: Fix tls_device handling of partial records Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 14:57   ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-26 15:05     ` Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 12:12 ` [PATCH net 2/4] tls: Fix write space handling Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 12:49   ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-26 14:13     ` Boris Pismenny
2019-03-11 15:06       ` Vakul Garg
2019-03-11 15:59         ` Boris Pismenny
2019-03-12  6:02           ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-26 12:12 ` [PATCH net 3/4] tls: Fix mixing between async capable and async Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 12:38   ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-26 13:43     ` Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 12:12 ` [PATCH net 4/4] tls: Fix tls_device receive Boris Pismenny
2019-02-26 15:01   ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-26 20:34   ` Dave Watson
2019-02-27  3:08     ` Vakul Garg
2019-02-27 15:23       ` Boris Pismenny
2019-02-27 16:28         ` Vakul Garg [this message]
2019-02-27 15:26     ` Boris Pismenny

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=DB7PR04MB42520668CB469E08C3D925CE8B740@DB7PR04MB4252.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=vakul.garg@nxp.com \
    --cc=aviadye@mellanox.com \
    --cc=borisp@mellanox.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davejwatson@fb.com \
    --cc=eranbe@mellanox.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).