Re: [PATCH 3.2 085/115] veth: donât modify ip_summed; doing so treats packets with bad checksums as good.

[Ben Greear]

On 04/30/2016 02:13 PM, Vijay Pandurangan wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 04/30/2016 12:54 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > > We've put considerable effort into cleaning up the checksum interface
> > > to make it as unambiguous as possible, please be very careful to
> > > follow it. Broken checksum processing is really hard to detect and
> > > debug.
> > >
> > > CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY means that some number of _specific_ checksums
> > > (indicated by csum_level) have been verified to be correct in a
> > > packet. Blindly promoting CHECKSUM_NONE to CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY is
> > > never right. If CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY is set in such a manner but the
> > > checksum it would refer to has not been verified and is incorrect this
> > > is a major bug.
> >
> >
> > Suppose I know that the packet received on a packet-socket has
> > already been verified by a NIC that supports hardware checksumming.
> >
> > Then, I want to transmit it on a veth interface using a second
> > packet socket.  I do not want veth to recalculate the checksum on
> > transmit, nor to validate it on the peer veth on receive, because I do
> > not want to waste the CPU cycles.  I am assuming that my app is not
> > accidentally corrupting frames, so the checksum can never be bad.
> >
> > How should the checksumming be configured for the packets going into
> > the packet-socket from user-space?
>
>
> It seems like that only the receiver should decide whether or not to
> checksum packets on the veth, not the sender.
>
> How about:
>
> We could add a receiving socket option for "don't checksum packets
> received from a veth when the other side has marked them as
> elide-checksum-suggested" (similar to UDP_NOCHECKSUM), and a sending
> socket option for "mark all data sent via this socket to a veth as
> elide-checksum-suggested".
>
> So the process would be:
>
> Writer:
> 1. open read socket
> 2. open write socket, with option elide-checksum-for-veth-suggested
> 3. write data
>
> Reader:
> 1. open read socket with "follow-elide-checksum-suggestions-on-veth"
> 2. read data
>
> The kernel / module would then need to persist the flag on all packets
> that traverse a veth, and drop these data when they leave the veth
> module.

I'm not sure this works completely.  In my app, the packet flow might be:

eth0 <-> raw-socket <-> user-space-bridge <-> raw-socket <-> vethA <-> vethB <-> [kernel router/bridge logic ...] <-> eth1

There may be no sockets on the vethB port.  And reader/writer is not
a good way to look at it since I am implementing a bi-directional bridge in
user-space and each packet-socket is for both rx and tx.

> > Also, I might want to send raw frames that do have
> > broken checksums (lets assume a real NIC, not veth), and I want them
> > to hit the wire with those bad checksums.
> >
> >
> > How do I configure the checksumming in this case?
>
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this is already possible now. You
> can have packets with incorrect checksum hitting the wire as is. What
> you cannot do is instruct the receiving end to ignore the checksum
> from the sending end when using a physical device (and something I
> think we should mimic on the sending device).

Yes, it does work currently (or, last I checked)...I just want to make sure it keeps working.

Thanks,
Ben

--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com