* [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment [not found] <1605706193-17192-1-git-send-email-luyicai@huawei.com> @ 2020-12-12 11:05 ` Yicai Lu 2020-12-14 14:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2020-12-16 13:36 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] " Yicai Lu 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Yicai Lu @ 2020-12-12 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev Cc: konstantin.ananyev, zhoujingbin, chenchanghu, jerry.lilijun, haifeng.lin, guohongzhi1, wangyunjian, Yicai Lu, stable In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and ignore the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, a packet whose data length is 1520 is sent. When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is divided into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet frame length, so it needs to be padded. |---------------------------------------------------| | HOST | | |--------------| |----------------------------| | | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | | |--------| |--------| |--------| | | | | | | | |-----------------| | | | | | | |--------| | | | bond | | |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| |--------| When processing the preceding packets above, DPDK would aggregate fragmented packets A2 and B. And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) is displayed in the middle of the packet. A2 + B: 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove the padding in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet") Cc: stable@dpdk.org Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> --- v4 -> v5: Update the comments and description. --- lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c index 1dda8ac..fdf66a4 100644 --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; int32_t ip_len; + int32_t trim; flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); @@ -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", __func__, __LINE__, - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, tbl->use_entries); @@ -134,6 +136,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf * return NULL; } + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) { + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); + } + /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); -- 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-12 11:05 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment Yicai Lu @ 2020-12-14 14:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2020-12-15 3:18 ` luyicai 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2020-12-14 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yicai Lu, dev Cc: zhoujingbin, chenchanghu, jerry.lilijun, haifeng.lin, guohongzhi1, wangyunjian, stable Hi Yicai, > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and > ignore the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, > a packet whose data length is 1520 is sent. > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is > divided into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet > frame length, so it needs to be padded. > > |---------------------------------------------------| > | HOST | > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > | | | | | > | |-----------------| | | > | | | > | |--------| | > | | bond | | > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > |--------| > > When processing the preceding packets above, > DPDK would aggregate fragmented packets A2 and B. > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) > is displayed in the middle of the packet. > > A2 + B: > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove > the padding in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > --- > v4 -> v5: Update the comments and description. > --- > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > index 1dda8ac..fdf66a4 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; > uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; > int32_t ip_len; > + int32_t trim; > > flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); > ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); > @@ -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > __func__, __LINE__, > - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, > + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > tbl->use_entries); > > @@ -134,6 +136,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > return NULL; > } > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) { > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > + } As a nit {} braces are not required for single expression. LGTM in general, just one thing: shouldn't we have the same fix for ipv6 then? Konstantin > + > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { > IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); > -- > 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-14 14:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2020-12-15 3:18 ` luyicai 2020-12-16 10:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: luyicai @ 2020-12-15 3:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ananyev, Konstantin, dev Cc: Zhoujingbin (Robin, Russell Lab), chenchanghu, Lilijun (Jerry), Linhaifeng, Guohongzhi (Russell Lab), wangyunjian, stable > -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.ananyev@intel.com] > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2020 10:45 PM > To: luyicai <luyicai@huawei.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Zhoujingbin (Robin, Russell Lab) <zhoujingbin@huawei.com>; chenchanghu <chenchanghu@huawei.com>; Lilijun (Jerry) <jerry.lilijun@huawei.com>; Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com>; Guohongzhi (Russell Lab) <guohongzhi1@huawei.com>; wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com>; stable@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment > Hi Yicai, > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and ignore > the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, a packet whose data > length is 1520 is sent. > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is divided > into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet frame > length, so it needs to be padded. > > |---------------------------------------------------| > | HOST | > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > | | | | | > | |-----------------| | | > | | | > | |--------| | > | | bond | | > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > |--------| > > When processing the preceding packets above, DPDK would aggregate > fragmented packets A2 and B. > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) is displayed in > the middle of the packet. > > A2 + B: > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove the padding > in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming > packet") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > --- > v4 -> v5: Update the comments and description. > --- > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 12 +++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > index 1dda8ac..fdf66a4 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; > uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; > int32_t ip_len; > + int32_t trim; > > flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); > ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); @@ > -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > __func__, __LINE__, > - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, > + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > tbl->use_entries); > > @@ -134,6 +136,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > return NULL; > } > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) { > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > + } > As a nit {} braces are not required for single expression. > LGTM in general, just one thing: shouldn't we have the same fix for ipv6 then? > Konstantin Hi Konstantin, Thanks! During the problem analysis, we have discussed on ipv6 and concluded that it does not exist in ipv6. For ipv6, it consists of the following parts: basic header = 40(bytes) DMAC = 6(bytes) SMAC = 6(bytes) Type = 2(bytes) CRC = 4(bytes) fragment header = 8(bytes) ... 40 + 6 + 6 + 2 + 4 + 8 = 66 (bytes) Total is already greater than min_ip_len(64). So it doesn't need to be padded with zeros. > + > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { > IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); > -- > 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-15 3:18 ` luyicai @ 2020-12-16 10:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2020-12-16 10:54 ` luyicai 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2020-12-16 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: luyicai, dev Cc: Zhoujingbin (Robin, Russell Lab), chenchanghu, Lilijun (Jerry), Linhaifeng, Guohongzhi (Russell Lab), wangyunjian, stable Hi Yicai, > > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and ignore > > the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, a packet whose data > > length is 1520 is sent. > > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is divided > > into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet frame > > length, so it needs to be padded. > > > > |---------------------------------------------------| > > | HOST | > > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > > | | | | | > > | |-----------------| | | > > | | | > > | |--------| | > > | | bond | | > > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > > |--------| > > > > When processing the preceding packets above, DPDK would aggregate > > fragmented packets A2 and B. > > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) is displayed in > > the middle of the packet. > > > > A2 + B: > > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove the padding > > in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > > > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming > > packet") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > > --- > > v4 -> v5: Update the comments and description. > > --- > > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 12 +++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > index 1dda8ac..fdf66a4 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; > > uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; > > int32_t ip_len; > > + int32_t trim; > > > > flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); > > ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); @@ > > -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > > > ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; > > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; > > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > > - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > > - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > > + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" > > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > > __func__, __LINE__, > > - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, > > + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, > > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > > tbl->use_entries); > > > > @@ -134,6 +136,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > return NULL; > > } > > > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) { > > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > > + } > > > As a nit {} braces are not required for single expression. > > LGTM in general, just one thing: shouldn't we have the same fix for ipv6 then? > > Konstantin > > Hi Konstantin, > > Thanks! > > During the problem analysis, we have discussed on ipv6 > and concluded that it does not exist in ipv6. > > For ipv6, it consists of the following parts: > basic header = 40(bytes) > DMAC = 6(bytes) > SMAC = 6(bytes) > Type = 2(bytes) > CRC = 4(bytes) > fragment header = 8(bytes) > ... > > 40 + 6 + 6 + 2 + 4 + 8 = 66 (bytes) > > Total is already greater than min_ip_len(64). So it doesn't > need to be padded with zeros. For normal cases - yes, but in theory there could be some unusual scenarios (tunnelled packet, different media, etc.). So for consistency and to avoid unforeseen issues - I think better to have the fix for both ipv4 and ipv6. After all the impact looks neglectable. Konstantin > > > + > > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > > if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { > > IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); > > -- > > 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-16 10:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2020-12-16 10:54 ` luyicai 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: luyicai @ 2020-12-16 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ananyev, Konstantin, dev Cc: Zhoujingbin (Robin, Russell Lab), chenchanghu, Lilijun (Jerry), Linhaifeng, Guohongzhi (Russell Lab), wangyunjian, stable -----Original Message----- From: Ananyev, Konstantin [mailto:konstantin.ananyev@intel.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2020 6:45 PM To: luyicai <luyicai@huawei.com>; dev@dpdk.org Cc: Zhoujingbin (Robin, Russell Lab) <zhoujingbin@huawei.com>; chenchanghu <chenchanghu@huawei.com>; Lilijun (Jerry) <jerry.lilijun@huawei.com>; Linhaifeng <haifeng.lin@huawei.com>; Guohongzhi (Russell Lab) <guohongzhi1@huawei.com>; wangyunjian <wangyunjian@huawei.com>; stable@dpdk.org Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment > Hi Yicai, > > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and ignore > > the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, a packet whose data > > length is 1520 is sent. > > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is divided > > into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet frame > > length, so it needs to be padded. > > > > |---------------------------------------------------| > > | HOST | > > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > > | | | | | > > | |-----------------| | | > > | | | > > | |--------| | > > | | bond | | > > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > > |--------| > > > > When processing the preceding packets above, DPDK would aggregate > > fragmented packets A2 and B. > > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) is displayed in > > the middle of the packet. > > > > A2 + B: > > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove the padding > > in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > > > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming > > packet") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > > --- > > v4 -> v5: Update the comments and description. > > --- > > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 12 +++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > index 1dda8ac..fdf66a4 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > > @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; > > uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; > > int32_t ip_len; > > + int32_t trim; > > > > flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); > > ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); @@ > > -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > > > ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; > > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; > > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > > - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > > - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > > + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" > > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > > __func__, __LINE__, > > - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, > > + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, > > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > > tbl->use_entries); > > > > @@ -134,6 +136,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > return NULL; > > } > > > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) { > > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > > + } > > > As a nit {} braces are not required for single expression. > > LGTM in general, just one thing: shouldn't we have the same fix for ipv6 then? > > Konstantin > > Hi Konstantin, > > Thanks! > > During the problem analysis, we have discussed on ipv6 and concluded > that it does not exist in ipv6. > > For ipv6, it consists of the following parts: > basic header = 40(bytes) > DMAC = 6(bytes) > SMAC = 6(bytes) > Type = 2(bytes) > CRC = 4(bytes) > fragment header = 8(bytes) > ... > > 40 + 6 + 6 + 2 + 4 + 8 = 66 (bytes) > > Total is already greater than min_ip_len(64). So it doesn't need to be > padded with zeros. > For normal cases - yes, but in theory there could be some unusual scenarios (tunnelled packet, different media, etc.). > So for consistency and to avoid unforeseen issues - I think better to have the fix for both ipv4 and ipv6. > After all the impact looks neglectable. > Konstantin Hi Konstantin, Agree! In terms of code symmetry, it should be better. Whatever, I'll submit an another patch(v6) later. > > > + > > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > > if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { > > IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); > > -- > > 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment [not found] <1605706193-17192-1-git-send-email-luyicai@huawei.com> 2020-12-12 11:05 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment Yicai Lu @ 2020-12-16 13:36 ` Yicai Lu 2020-12-18 11:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Yicai Lu @ 2020-12-16 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: dev Cc: konstantin.ananyev, zhoujingbin, chenchanghu, jerry.lilijun, haifeng.lin, guohongzhi1, wangyunjian, Yicai Lu, stable In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and ignore the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, a packet whose data length is 1520 is sent. When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is divided into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet frame length, so it needs to be padded. |---------------------------------------------------| | HOST | | |--------------| |----------------------------| | | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | | |--------| |--------| |--------| | | | | | | | |-----------------| | | | | | | |--------| | | | bond | | |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| |--------| When processing the preceding packets above, DPDK would aggregate fragmented packets A2 and B. And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) is displayed in the middle of the packet. A2 + B: 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove the padding in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. And also we have the fix for both ipv4 and ipv6. Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet") Cc: stable@dpdk.org Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> --- v5 -> v6: Have the fix for ipv6. --- lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 11 ++++++++--- lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c | 9 +++++++-- 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c index 1dda8ac..69666c8 100644 --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; int32_t ip_len; + int32_t trim; flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); @@ -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", __func__, __LINE__, - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, tbl->use_entries); @@ -134,6 +136,9 @@ struct rte_mbuf * return NULL; } + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); + /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c index ad01055..4037da0 100644 --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c @@ -142,6 +142,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * struct ip_frag_key key; uint16_t ip_ofs; int32_t ip_len; + int32_t trim; rte_memcpy(&key.src_dst[0], ip_hdr->src_addr, 16); rte_memcpy(&key.src_dst[2], ip_hdr->dst_addr, 16); @@ -158,16 +159,17 @@ struct rte_mbuf * * this is what we remove from the payload len. */ ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->payload_len) - sizeof(*frag_hdr); + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <" IPv6_KEY_BYTES_FMT ", %#x>, " - "ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", __func__, __LINE__, mb, tms, IPv6_KEY_BYTES(key.src_dst), key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, - RTE_IPV6_GET_MF(frag_hdr->frag_data), + trim, RTE_IPV6_GET_MF(frag_hdr->frag_data), tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, tbl->use_entries); @@ -177,6 +179,9 @@ struct rte_mbuf * return NULL; } + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); + /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms); if (fp == NULL) { -- 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-16 13:36 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] " Yicai Lu @ 2020-12-18 11:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2021-01-15 10:29 ` Thomas Monjalon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2020-12-18 11:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yicai Lu, dev Cc: zhoujingbin, chenchanghu, jerry.lilijun, haifeng.lin, guohongzhi1, wangyunjian, stable > > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and > ignore the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, > a packet whose data length is 1520 is sent. > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is > divided into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet > frame length, so it needs to be padded. > > |---------------------------------------------------| > | HOST | > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > | | | | | > | |-----------------| | | > | | | > | |--------| | > | | bond | | > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > |--------| > > When processing the preceding packets above, > DPDK would aggregate fragmented packets A2 and B. > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) > is displayed in the middle of the packet. > > A2 + B: > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove > the padding in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > And also we have the fix for both ipv4 and ipv6. > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > --- > v5 -> v6: Have the fix for ipv6. > --- > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c | 11 ++++++++--- > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c | 9 +++++++-- > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > index 1dda8ac..69666c8 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv4_reassembly.c > @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > const unaligned_uint64_t *psd; > uint16_t flag_offset, ip_ofs, ip_flag; > int32_t ip_len; > + int32_t trim; > > flag_offset = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->fragment_offset); > ip_ofs = (uint16_t)(flag_offset & RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_MASK); > @@ -117,14 +118,15 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > > ip_ofs *= RTE_IPV4_HDR_OFFSET_UNITS; > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->total_length) - mb->l3_len; > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > - "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > - ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>, ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > + "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 ", key: <%" PRIx64 ", %#x>" > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > __func__, __LINE__, > - mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, ip_flag, > + mb, tms, key.src_dst[0], key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, trim, ip_flag, > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > tbl->use_entries); > > @@ -134,6 +136,9 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > return NULL; > } > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > + > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > if ((fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms)) == NULL) { > IP_FRAG_MBUF2DR(dr, mb); > diff --git a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c > index ad01055..4037da0 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c > +++ b/lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_reassembly.c > @@ -142,6 +142,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > struct ip_frag_key key; > uint16_t ip_ofs; > int32_t ip_len; > + int32_t trim; > > rte_memcpy(&key.src_dst[0], ip_hdr->src_addr, 16); > rte_memcpy(&key.src_dst[2], ip_hdr->dst_addr, 16); > @@ -158,16 +159,17 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > * this is what we remove from the payload len. > */ > ip_len = rte_be_to_cpu_16(ip_hdr->payload_len) - sizeof(*frag_hdr); > + trim = mb->pkt_len - (ip_len + mb->l3_len + mb->l2_len); > > IP_FRAG_LOG(DEBUG, "%s:%d:\n" > "mbuf: %p, tms: %" PRIu64 > ", key: <" IPv6_KEY_BYTES_FMT ", %#x>, " > - "ofs: %u, len: %d, flags: %#x\n" > + "ofs: %u, len: %d, padding: %d, flags: %#x\n" > "tbl: %p, max_cycles: %" PRIu64 ", entry_mask: %#x, " > "max_entries: %u, use_entries: %u\n\n", > __func__, __LINE__, > mb, tms, IPv6_KEY_BYTES(key.src_dst), key.id, ip_ofs, ip_len, > - RTE_IPV6_GET_MF(frag_hdr->frag_data), > + trim, RTE_IPV6_GET_MF(frag_hdr->frag_data), > tbl, tbl->max_cycles, tbl->entry_mask, tbl->max_entries, > tbl->use_entries); > > @@ -177,6 +179,9 @@ struct rte_mbuf * > return NULL; > } > > + if (unlikely(trim > 0)) > + rte_pktmbuf_trim(mb, trim); > + > /* try to find/add entry into the fragment's table. */ > fp = ip_frag_find(tbl, dr, &key, tms); > if (fp == NULL) { > -- Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> > 1.9.5.msysgit.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment 2020-12-18 11:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin @ 2021-01-15 10:29 ` Thomas Monjalon 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-01-15 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yicai Lu Cc: dev, stable, zhoujingbin, chenchanghu, jerry.lilijun, haifeng.lin, guohongzhi1, wangyunjian, Ananyev, Konstantin > > In some situations, we would get several ip fragments, which total > > data length is less than min_ip_len(64) and padding with zeros. > > We simulated intermediate fragments by modifying the MTU. > > To illustrate the problem, we simplify the packet format and > > ignore the impact of the packet header.In namespace2, > > a packet whose data length is 1520 is sent. > > When the packet passes tap2, the packet is divided into two > > fragments: fragment A and B, similar to (1520 = 1510 + 10). > > When the packet passes tap3, the larger fragment packet A is > > divided into two fragments A1 and A2, similar to (1510 = 1500 + 10). > > Finally, the bond interface receives three fragments: > > A1, A2, and B (1520 = 1500 + 10 + 10). > > One fragmented packet A2 is smaller than the minimum Ethernet > > frame length, so it needs to be padded. > > > > |---------------------------------------------------| > > | HOST | > > | |--------------| |----------------------------| | > > | | ns2 | | |--------------| | | > > | | |--------| | | |--------| |--------| | | > > | | | tap1 | | | | tap2 | ns1| tap3 | | | > > | | |mtu=1510| | | |mtu=1510| |mtu=1500| | | > > | |--|1.1.1.1 |--| |--|1.1.1.2 |----|2.1.1.1 |--| | > > | |--------| |--------| |--------| | > > | | | | | > > | |-----------------| | | > > | | | > > | |--------| | > > | | bond | | > > |--------------------------------------|mtu=1500|---| > > |--------| > > > > When processing the preceding packets above, > > DPDK would aggregate fragmented packets A2 and B. > > And error packets are generated, which padding(zero) > > is displayed in the middle of the packet. > > > > A2 + B: > > 0000 fa 16 3e 9f fb 82 fa 47 b2 57 dc 20 08 00 45 00 > > 0010 00 33 b4 66 00 ba 3f 01 c1 a5 01 01 01 01 02 01 > > 0020 01 02 c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 c7 00 00 00 00 00 00 > > 0030 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 c8 c9 ca cb > > 0040 cc cd ce cf d0 d1 d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 d8 d9 da db > > 0050 dc dd de df e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 > > > > So, we would calculate the length of padding, and remove > > the padding in pkt_len and data_len before aggregation. > > And also we have the fix for both ipv4 and ipv6. > > > > Fixes: 7f0983ee331c ("ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Yicai Lu <luyicai@huawei.com> > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Applied, thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-01-15 10:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1605706193-17192-1-git-send-email-luyicai@huawei.com>
2020-12-12 11:05 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ip_frag: remove padding length of fragment Yicai Lu
2020-12-14 14:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-12-15 3:18 ` luyicai
2020-12-16 10:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-12-16 10:54 ` luyicai
2020-12-16 13:36 ` [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] " Yicai Lu
2020-12-18 11:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-01-15 10:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).