Re: [PATCH net] net/tls: Fix kernel panic when socket is in TLS ULP

[Vinay Kumar Yadav <vinay.yadav@chelsio.com>]

On 11/10/2020 10:37 AM, Vinay Kumar Yadav wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/10/2020 12:28 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 00:21:13 +0530 Vinay Kumar Yadav wrote:
>>> On 11/7/2020 1:58 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 7 Nov 2020 02:02:42 +0530 Vinay Kumar Yadav wrote:
>>>>> On 11/6/2020 12:16 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 23:55:15 +0530 Vinay Kumar Yadav wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> We should prevent from the socket getting into LISTEN state in 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> first place. Can we make a copy of proto_ops (like 
>>>>>>>>>> tls_sw_proto_ops)
>>>>>>>>>> and set listen to sock_no_listen?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Once tls-toe (TLS_HW_RECORD) is configured on a socket, 
>>>>>>>>> listen() call
>>>>>>>>> from user on same socket will create hash at two places.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What I'm saying is - disallow listen calls on sockets with tls-toe
>>>>>>>> installed on them. Is that not possible?
>>>>>>> You mean socket with tls-toe installed shouldn't be listening at 
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>> than adapter? basically avoid ctx->sk_proto->hash(sk) call.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, replace the listen callback, like I said. Why are you talking 
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> hash???
>>>>>> As per my understanding we can't avoid socket listen.
>>>>> Not sure how replacing listen callback solve the issue,
>>>>> can you please elaborate ?
>>>>
>>>> TLS sockets are not supposed to get into listen state. IIUC the problem
>>>> is that the user is able to set TLS TOE on a socket which then starts
>>>> to listen and the state gets cloned improperly.
>>>
>>> TLS-TOE can go to listen mode, removing listen is not an option and
>>> TLS-TOE support only server mode so if we remove listen then we will not
>>> have TLS-TOE support which we don't want.
>>
>> Oh, so it's completely incompatible with kernel tls. How about we
>> remove the support completely then? Clearly it's not an offload of
>> kernel tls if it supports completely different mode of operation.
>>
> 
> It is not incompatible. It fits in k.org tls infrastructure (TLS-TOE 
> mode). For the current issue we have proposed a fix. What is the issue 
> with proposed fix, can you elaborate and we will address that?
and it is valid TLS offload mode.