From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 2 13:03:55 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93BCE2F8; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:03:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.turbocat.net (heidi.turbocat.net [88.198.202.214]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CCCF81; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laptop015.home.selasky.org (cm-176.74.213.204.customer.telag.net [176.74.213.204]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.turbocat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A057E1FE022; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 15:03:45 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <551D3E5D.6060606@selasky.org> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 15:04:29 +0200 From: Hans Petter Selasky User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff , Ian Lepore Subject: Re: svn commit: r280971 - in head: contrib/ipfilter/tools share/man/man4 sys/contrib/ipfilter/netinet sys/netinet sys/netipsec sys/netpfil/pf References: <201504012226.t31MQedN044443@svn.freebsd.org> <1427929676.82583.103.camel@freebsd.org> <20150402123522.GC64665@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20150402123522.GC64665@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 13:03:55 -0000 On 04/02/15 14:35, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:07:56PM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote: > I> > Author: glebius > I> > Date: Wed Apr 1 22:26:39 2015 > I> > New Revision: 280971 > I> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/280971 > I> > > I> > Log: > I> > o Use new function ip_fillid() in all places throughout the kernel, > I> > where we want to create a new IP datagram. > I> > o Add support for RFC6864, which allows to set IP ID for atomic IP > I> > datagrams to any value, to improve performance. The behaviour is > I> > controlled by net.inet.ip.rfc6864 sysctl knob, which is enabled by > I> > default. > I> > o In case if we generate IP ID, use counter(9) to improve performance. > I> > o Gather all code related to IP ID into ip_id.c. > I> > > I> > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2177 > I> > Reviewed by: adrian, cy, rpaulo > I> > Tested by: Emeric POUPON > I> > Sponsored by: Netflix > I> > Sponsored by: Nginx, Inc. > I> > Relnotes: yes > I> > > I> [...] > I> > +void > I> > +ip_fillid(struct ip *ip) > I> > +{ > I> > + > I> > + /* > I> > + * Per RFC6864 Section 4 > I> > + * > I> > + * o Atomic datagrams: (DF==1) && (MF==0) && (frag_offset==0) > I> > + * o Non-atomic datagrams: (DF==0) || (MF==1) || (frag_offset>0) > I> > + */ > I> > + if (V_ip_rfc6864 && (ip->ip_off & htons(IP_DF)) == htons(IP_DF)) > I> > + ip->ip_id = 0; > I> > + else if (V_ip_do_randomid) > I> > + ip->ip_id = ip_randomid(); > I> > + else { > I> > + counter_u64_add(V_ip_id, 1); > I> > + ip->ip_id = htons((*(uint64_t *)zpcpu_get(V_ip_id)) & 0xffff); > I> > + } > I> > +} > I> > + > I> > I> This is completely bogus. It's a big opacity violation (it relies on > I> what should be opaque private internal implementation details of > I> counter(9)). The fact that the counter api doesn't provide a function > I> for retrieving one cpu's counter value should be a big clue there -- the > I> fact that you know the internals doesn't make it okay to reach behind > I> the counter and grab a value like that. It may not even be safe to do > I> so on any given architecture; it certainly isn't safe on arm, and that > I> line of code above will work only by accident because you're throwing > I> way all but 16 bits. > > I though about providing that API, but since it isn't safe in general, > I decided to not do that. > > I> But even more importantly, this WILL result in multiple threads using > I> the same value at the same time... > I> > I> - Thread A on CPU 1 and thread B on CPU 2 both begin executing here at > I> the same time, and both get through counter_u64_add(). > I> - Thread A keeps running and uses CPU 1's new value, call it 27. > I> - Thread B gets prempted between counter_u64_add() and zpcpu_get(). > I> When it resumes it's now on CPU 1, so it retrieves value 27 as well. > > This was already discussed in this thread: > > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2015-March/069864.html > Hi, At least the generation of IP IDs is now in a common place. I think the random likelyhood argument is not acceptable. Also there should be a critical section around the incrementing of the counter and fetching it. What if a different CPU is handling the same IP connection, then ID ranges are are likely to repeat. What I don't understand is in the following link: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6864 It says: "is required to be unique within the maximum lifetime for all datagrams with a given source address/destination address/protocol tuple." When you have a IP based socket, why is this counter not part of the IP based socket? Why do we have a global counter? --HPS