...and handle the situation more reasonably if that happens.
Stefano Brivio (2):
tap: Keep stream consistent if qemu length descriptor spans two recv()
calls
tap: Return -EIO from tap_handler_passt() on inconsistent packet
stream
tap.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--
2.35.1
I got all paranoid after triggering a divide-by-zero general
protection fault in passt with a qemu version without the virtio_net
TX hang fix, while flooding UDP. I start thinking this was actually
coming from some random changes I was playing with, but before
reaching this conclusion I reviewed once more the relatively short
path in tap_handler_passt() before we start using packet_*()
functions, and found this.
Never observed in practice, but artificially reproduced with changes
in qemu's socket interface: if we don't receive from qemu a complete
length descriptor in one recv() call, or if we receive a partial one
at the end of one call, we currently disregard the rest, which would
make the stream inconsistent.
Nothing really bad happens, except that from that point on we would
disregard all the packets we get until, if ever, we get the stream
back in sync by chance.
Force reading a complete packet length descriptor with a blocking
recv(), if needed -- not just a complete packet later.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>
---
tap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c
index f8314ef..11ac732 100644
--- a/tap.c
+++ b/tap.c
@@ -747,14 +747,26 @@ redo:
return -ECONNRESET;
}
- while (n > (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) {
- ssize_t len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p);
+ while (n > 0) {
+ ssize_t len;
+
+ /* Force receiving at least a complete length descriptor to
+ * avoid an inconsistent stream.
+ */
+ if (n < (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) {
+ rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n,
+ (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t) - n, 0);
+ if ((n += rem) != (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t))
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p);
p += sizeof(uint32_t);
n -= sizeof(uint32_t);
/* At most one packet might not fit in a single read, and this
- * needs to be blocking.
+ * also needs to be blocking.
*/
if (len > n) {
rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, len - n, 0);
--
2.35.1
On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:54:18AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:I got all paranoid after triggering a divide-by-zero general protection fault in passt with a qemu version without the virtio_net TX hang fix, while flooding UDP. I start thinking this was actually coming from some random changes I was playing with, but before reaching this conclusion I reviewed once more the relatively short path in tap_handler_passt() before we start using packet_*() functions, and found this. Never observed in practice, but artificially reproduced with changes in qemu's socket interface: if we don't receive from qemu a complete length descriptor in one recv() call, or if we receive a partial one at the end of one call, we currently disregard the rest, which would make the stream inconsistent. Nothing really bad happens, except that from that point on we would disregard all the packets we get until, if ever, we get the stream back in sync by chance. Force reading a complete packet length descriptor with a blocking recv(), if needed -- not just a complete packet later. Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>This seems an ok short term fix, but I think we want another approach in the slightly longer term. Read on..--- tap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c index f8314ef..11ac732 100644 --- a/tap.c +++ b/tap.c @@ -747,14 +747,26 @@ redo: return -ECONNRESET; } - while (n > (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { - ssize_t len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); + while (n > 0) { + ssize_t len; + + /* Force receiving at least a complete length descriptor to + * avoid an inconsistent stream. + */Is it actually enough for this to be blocking? AFAICT, recv() on a stream socket, like read(), can return less data than you requested.+ if (n < (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { + rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, + (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t) - n, 0); + if ((n += rem) != (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) + return 0; + } + + len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); p += sizeof(uint32_t); n -= sizeof(uint32_t); /* At most one packet might not fit in a single read, and this - * needs to be blocking. + * also needs to be blocking.Same issue here (obviously not introduced by this patch, though).*/ if (len > n) { rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, len - n, 0);Can we handle both these cases more neatly (and without blocking recv()) calls, if we maintain two pointers into pkt_buf. The first one tracks how much we've read from the qemu socket, the second tracks how much has been parsed into packets. When we get an epoll notification on the qemu socket, we recv() and advance the first pointer. Then we discern as many full packets as we can, advancing the second pointer. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 21:15:48 +1100 David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:54:18AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:It's not enough, hence the check on 'rem' afterwards, and this doesn't cover anyway the case were qemu would decide to send one byte at a time (because as you pointed out blocking doesn't mean we'll get the full amount requested), which never happens in practice, though.I got all paranoid after triggering a divide-by-zero general protection fault in passt with a qemu version without the virtio_net TX hang fix, while flooding UDP. I start thinking this was actually coming from some random changes I was playing with, but before reaching this conclusion I reviewed once more the relatively short path in tap_handler_passt() before we start using packet_*() functions, and found this. Never observed in practice, but artificially reproduced with changes in qemu's socket interface: if we don't receive from qemu a complete length descriptor in one recv() call, or if we receive a partial one at the end of one call, we currently disregard the rest, which would make the stream inconsistent. Nothing really bad happens, except that from that point on we would disregard all the packets we get until, if ever, we get the stream back in sync by chance. Force reading a complete packet length descriptor with a blocking recv(), if needed -- not just a complete packet later. Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>This seems an ok short term fix, but I think we want another approach in the slightly longer term. Read on..--- tap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c index f8314ef..11ac732 100644 --- a/tap.c +++ b/tap.c @@ -747,14 +747,26 @@ redo: return -ECONNRESET; } - while (n > (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { - ssize_t len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); + while (n > 0) { + ssize_t len; + + /* Force receiving at least a complete length descriptor to + * avoid an inconsistent stream. + */Is it actually enough for this to be blocking? AFAICT, recv() on a stream socket, like read(), can return less data than you requested.Same here.+ if (n < (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { + rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, + (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t) - n, 0); + if ((n += rem) != (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) + return 0; + } + + len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); p += sizeof(uint32_t); n -= sizeof(uint32_t); /* At most one packet might not fit in a single read, and this - * needs to be blocking. + * also needs to be blocking.Same issue here (obviously not introduced by this patch, though).Yes, and I actually drafted something like that, but it takes a lot of attention and time to get it right, so I preferred to keep it simple until now. I can file a ticket as enhancement. Also, given that a subsequent recv() would operate on the "next" pointer, it will have less space available than the first one. Ideally this should be a ringbuffer (using scatter-gather IO). -- Stefano*/ if (len > n) { rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, len - n, 0);Can we handle both these cases more neatly (and without blocking recv()) calls, if we maintain two pointers into pkt_buf. The first one tracks how much we've read from the qemu socket, the second tracks how much has been parsed into packets. When we get an epoll notification on the qemu socket, we recv() and advance the first pointer. Then we discern as many full packets as we can, advancing the second pointer.
On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 11:29:29 +0100 Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com> wrote:On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 21:15:48 +1100 David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=38 -- StefanoOn Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:54:18AM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:It's not enough, hence the check on 'rem' afterwards, and this doesn't cover anyway the case were qemu would decide to send one byte at a time (because as you pointed out blocking doesn't mean we'll get the full amount requested), which never happens in practice, though.I got all paranoid after triggering a divide-by-zero general protection fault in passt with a qemu version without the virtio_net TX hang fix, while flooding UDP. I start thinking this was actually coming from some random changes I was playing with, but before reaching this conclusion I reviewed once more the relatively short path in tap_handler_passt() before we start using packet_*() functions, and found this. Never observed in practice, but artificially reproduced with changes in qemu's socket interface: if we don't receive from qemu a complete length descriptor in one recv() call, or if we receive a partial one at the end of one call, we currently disregard the rest, which would make the stream inconsistent. Nothing really bad happens, except that from that point on we would disregard all the packets we get until, if ever, we get the stream back in sync by chance. Force reading a complete packet length descriptor with a blocking recv(), if needed -- not just a complete packet later. Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>This seems an ok short term fix, but I think we want another approach in the slightly longer term. Read on..--- tap.c | 18 +++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c index f8314ef..11ac732 100644 --- a/tap.c +++ b/tap.c @@ -747,14 +747,26 @@ redo: return -ECONNRESET; } - while (n > (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { - ssize_t len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); + while (n > 0) { + ssize_t len; + + /* Force receiving at least a complete length descriptor to + * avoid an inconsistent stream. + */Is it actually enough for this to be blocking? AFAICT, recv() on a stream socket, like read(), can return less data than you requested.Same here.+ if (n < (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) { + rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, + (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t) - n, 0); + if ((n += rem) != (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t)) + return 0; + } + + len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p); p += sizeof(uint32_t); n -= sizeof(uint32_t); /* At most one packet might not fit in a single read, and this - * needs to be blocking. + * also needs to be blocking.Same issue here (obviously not introduced by this patch, though).Yes, and I actually drafted something like that, but it takes a lot of attention and time to get it right, so I preferred to keep it simple until now. I can file a ticket as enhancement.*/ if (len > n) { rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, len - n, 0);Can we handle both these cases more neatly (and without blocking recv()) calls, if we maintain two pointers into pkt_buf. The first one tracks how much we've read from the qemu socket, the second tracks how much has been parsed into packets. When we get an epoll notification on the qemu socket, we recv() and advance the first pointer. Then we discern as many full packets as we can, advancing the second pointer.
While it's important to fail in that case, it makes little sense to
fail quietly: it's better to tell qemu explicitly that something went
wrong and that we won't recover, by closing the socket.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com>
---
tap.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c
index 11ac732..abeff25 100644
--- a/tap.c
+++ b/tap.c
@@ -757,7 +757,7 @@ redo:
rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n,
(ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t) - n, 0);
if ((n += rem) != (ssize_t)sizeof(uint32_t))
- return 0;
+ return -EIO;
}
len = ntohl(*(uint32_t *)p);
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ redo:
if (len > n) {
rem = recv(c->fd_tap, p + n, len - n, 0);
if ((n += rem) != len)
- return 0;
+ return -EIO;
}
/* Complete the partial read above before discarding a malformed
--
2.35.1