Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-203097-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 15:24:39 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Chengen Du <chengen.du@canonical.com>, 
 Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, 
 edumazet@google.com, 
 kuba@kernel.org, 
 pabeni@redhat.com, 
 kaber@trash.net, 
 netdev@vger.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
 stable@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <6660bb77cdfc6_3581cb29471@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <CAPza5qctPn_yrFQrO_2NHXpz-kf1qTwxk_APn2t5VU30sY=-MQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20240604054823.20649-1-chengen.du@canonical.com>
 <665f9bccaa91c_2bf7de294f4@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
 <CAPza5qctPn_yrFQrO_2NHXpz-kf1qTwxk_APn2t5VU30sY=-MQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] af_packet: Handle outgoing VLAN packets without
 hardware offloading
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Chengen Du wrote:
> Hi Willem,
> =

> My apologies, but I still have some questions I would like to discuss w=
ith you.
> =

> On Wed, Jun 5, 2024 at 6:57=E2=80=AFAM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Chengen Du wrote:
> > > The issue initially stems from libpcap. The ethertype will be overw=
ritten
> > > as the VLAN TPID if the network interface lacks hardware VLAN offlo=
ading.
> > > In the outbound packet path, if hardware VLAN offloading is unavail=
able,
> > > the VLAN tag is inserted into the payload but then cleared from the=
 sk_buff
> > > struct. Consequently, this can lead to a false negative when checki=
ng for
> > > the presence of a VLAN tag, causing the packet sniffing outcome to =
lack
> > > VLAN tag information (i.e., TCI-TPID). As a result, the packet capt=
uring
> > > tool may be unable to parse packets as expected.
> > >
> > > The TCI-TPID is missing because the prb_fill_vlan_info() function d=
oes not
> > > modify the tp_vlan_tci/tp_vlan_tpid values, as the information is i=
n the
> > > payload and not in the sk_buff struct. The skb_vlan_tag_present() f=
unction
> > > only checks vlan_all in the sk_buff struct. In cooked mode, the L2 =
header
> > > is stripped, preventing the packet capturing tool from determining =
the
> > > correct TCI-TPID value. Additionally, the protocol in SLL is incorr=
ect,
> > > which means the packet capturing tool cannot parse the L3 header co=
rrectly.
> > >
> > > Link: https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group/libpcap/issues/1105
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240520070348.26725-1-chengen=
.du@canonical.com/T/#u
> > > Fixes: 393e52e33c6c ("packet: deliver VLAN TCI to userspace")
> > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Chengen Du <chengen.du@canonical.com>
> > > ---
> > >  net/packet/af_packet.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
++--
> > >  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > index ea3ebc160e25..53d51ac87ac6 100644
> > > --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > @@ -538,6 +538,52 @@ static void *packet_current_frame(struct packe=
t_sock *po,
> > >       return packet_lookup_frame(po, rb, rb->head, status);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +static u16 vlan_get_tci(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > +{
> > > +     unsigned int vlan_depth =3D skb->mac_len;
> > > +     struct vlan_hdr vhdr, *vh;
> > > +     u8 *skb_head =3D skb->data;
> > > +     int skb_len =3D skb->len;
> > > +
> > > +     if (vlan_depth) {
> > > +             if (WARN_ON(vlan_depth < VLAN_HLEN))
> > > +                     return 0;
> > > +             vlan_depth -=3D VLAN_HLEN;
> > > +     } else {
> > > +             vlan_depth =3D ETH_HLEN;
> > > +     }
> > > +
> > > +     skb_push(skb, skb->data - skb_mac_header(skb));
> > > +     vh =3D skb_header_pointer(skb, vlan_depth, sizeof(vhdr), &vhd=
r);
> > > +     if (skb_head !=3D skb->data) {
> > > +             skb->data =3D skb_head;
> > > +             skb->len =3D skb_len;
> > > +     }
> > > +     if (unlikely(!vh))
> > > +             return 0;
> > > +
> > > +     return ntohs(vh->h_vlan_TCI);
> >
> > As stated in the conversation: no need for the vlan_depth code.
> >
> > skb->data is either at the link layer header or immediately beyond it=

> > (i.e., at the outer vlan tag).
> =

> I'm confused about this part and feel there may be some
> misunderstanding on my end. From what I understand, skb->data will be
> at different positions depending on the scenario. For example, in
> tpacket_rcv(), in SOCK_RAW, it will be at the link layer header, but
> for SOCK_DGRAM with PACKET_OUTGOING, it will be at the network layer
> header.

Right, but that is a binary option. Either at L2 or right after.

skb_header_pointer(skb, skb_mac_offset(skb) - ETH_VLEN, ...) will do.
> =

> Given this situation, it seems necessary to adjust skb->data to point
> to the link layer header and then seek the VLAN tag based on the MAC
> length, rather than parsing directly from the skb->data head. Could
> you please clarify this in more detail?
> =

> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static __be16 vlan_get_protocol_dgram(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > +{
> > > +     __be16 proto =3D skb->protocol;
> > > +
> > > +     if (unlikely(eth_type_vlan(proto))) {
> > > +             u8 *skb_head =3D skb->data;
> >
> > Since skb->head is a different thing from skb->data, please call this=

> > orig_data or so.
> > > +             int skb_len =3D skb->len;
> > > +
> > > +             skb_push(skb, skb->data - skb_mac_header(skb));
> > > +             proto =3D __vlan_get_protocol(skb, proto, NULL);
> > > +             if (skb_head !=3D skb->data) {
> > > +                     skb->data =3D skb_head;
> > > +                     skb->len =3D skb_len;
> > > +             }
> > > +     }
> >
> > I don't see a way around this temporary skb->data mangling, so +1
> > unless someone else suggests a cleaner way.
> >
> > On second thought, one option:
> >
> > This adds some parsing overhead in the datapath. SOCK_RAW does not
> > need it, as it can see the whole VLAN tag. Perhaps limit the new
> > branches to SOCK_DGRAM cases? Then the above can also be simplified.
> =

> I considered this approach before, but it would result in different
> metadata for SOCK_DGRAM and SOCK_RAW scenarios. This difference makes
> me hesitate because it might be better to provide consistent metadata
> to describe the same packet, regardless of the receiver's approach.
> These are just my thoughts and I'm open to further discussion.

See Alexandre's response and my follow-up.=