From: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com>
To: Xiao Liang <shaw.leon@gmail.com>
Cc: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
Akhil Goyal <gakhil@marvell.com>,
Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>,
Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH] ipsec: fix NAT-T length calculation
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2023 09:59:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e5b44e05-7c4a-5e07-dc0d-71c9138a92b5@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABAhCOSD1dqzxpA-r0iLKOV4WaVuC=H_4cgAAv2rkRaiJsA4fw@mail.gmail.com>
On 07-Jul-23 4:12 AM, Xiao Liang wrote:
> |<- mb->pkt_len - sqh_len ->|
> |<- sa->hdr_len ->|
> |<- sa->hdr_l3_off ->| |<- udph->dgram_len ->|
>
> +--------------------+------------+-----+-----+---------+-----+
> | ETH | IP | UDP | ESP | payload | sqh |
> +--------------------+------------+-----+-----+---------+-----+
>
> |<- sa->hdr_l3_off ->|<- l3_len ->|
> |<- prm->tun.hdr_len ->|
> |<- sa->hdr_len ->|
sa->hdr_len and prm->tun.hdr_len don't include L2 length so both should
start in the diagram at the end of the ETH header.
So the right way to compute datagram length is
dgram_len = mb->pkt_len - sqh_len - sa->hdr_l3_off - sa->hdr_len +
sizeof(struct rte_udp_hdr)
>
> The figure above shows how
> udph->dgram_len = mb->pkt_len - sqh_len - sa->hdr_len +
> sizeof(struct rte_udp_hdr);
> and
> l3_len = prm->tun.hdr_len - sa->hdr_l3_off;
>
> Correct me if anything wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> Xiao Liang
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 6:20 PM Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 06-Jul-23 10:08 AM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
>>> Hi Akhil,
>>>
>>>> Hi Konstantin,
>>>> Can you review this patch?
>>>>
>>>>> UDP header length is included in sa->hdr_len. Take care of that in
>>>>> L3 header and pakcet length calculation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 01eef5907fc3 ("ipsec: support NAT-T")
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Liang <shaw.leon@gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> lib/ipsec/esp_outb.c | 2 +-
>>>>> lib/ipsec/sa.c | 2 +-
>>>>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/ipsec/esp_outb.c b/lib/ipsec/esp_outb.c
>>>>> index 9cbd9202f6..ec87b1dce2 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/ipsec/esp_outb.c
>>>>> +++ b/lib/ipsec/esp_outb.c
>>>>> @@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ outb_tun_pkt_prepare(struct rte_ipsec_sa *sa,
>>>>> rte_be64_t sqc,
>>>>> struct rte_udp_hdr *udph = (struct rte_udp_hdr *)
>>>>> (ph + sa->hdr_len - sizeof(struct rte_udp_hdr));
>>>>> udph->dgram_len = rte_cpu_to_be_16(mb->pkt_len - sqh_len -
>>>>> - sa->hdr_l3_off - sa->hdr_len);
>>>>> + sa->hdr_len + sizeof(struct rte_udp_hdr));
>>> To be honest, it is not clear to me why we shouldn't take into account sa->hdr_l3_off
>>> any more.
>>> Probably the author can explain.
>>> Also would like author of NAT-T support to chime in.
>>> Radu, any comments on that patch?
>> I agree, hdr_l3_off should not be ignored. Also sa->hdr_len already
>> includes the size of UDP header, see line 366 in esp_outb_tun_init in
>> sa.c (or the line above this change, where the udph pointer is computed
>> assuming this)
>>> Thanks
>>> Konstantin
>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* update original and new ip header fields */
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/ipsec/sa.c b/lib/ipsec/sa.c
>>>>> index 59a547637d..2297bd6d72 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/ipsec/sa.c
>>>>> +++ b/lib/ipsec/sa.c
>>>>> @@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ esp_outb_tun_init(struct rte_ipsec_sa *sa, const struct
>>>>> rte_ipsec_sa_prm *prm)
>>>>>
>>>>> /* update l2_len and l3_len fields for outbound mbuf */
>>>>> sa->tx_offload.val = rte_mbuf_tx_offload(sa->hdr_l3_off,
>>>>> - sa->hdr_len - sa->hdr_l3_off, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0);
>>>>> + prm->tun.hdr_len - sa->hdr_l3_off, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0);
>>>>>
>>>>> esp_outb_init(sa, sa->hdr_len, prm->ipsec_xform.esn.value);
>>>>> }
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.40.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-07 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-18 8:46 Xiao Liang
2023-07-05 13:49 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
2023-07-06 9:08 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2023-07-06 10:20 ` Radu Nicolau
2023-07-07 2:06 ` Xiao Liang
2023-07-07 3:12 ` Xiao Liang
2023-07-07 8:59 ` Radu Nicolau [this message]
2023-07-07 12:51 ` Xiao Liang
2023-07-07 13:17 ` Xiao Liang
2023-07-07 13:26 ` Radu Nicolau
2023-07-10 9:24 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2023-07-10 9:38 ` Radu Nicolau
2023-07-10 9:20 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2023-07-11 2:13 ` [PATCH v2] ipsec: fix NAT-T header " Xiao Liang
2023-07-11 2:18 ` Xiao Liang
2023-07-11 8:48 ` [EXT] " Akhil Goyal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e5b44e05-7c4a-5e07-dc0d-71c9138a92b5@intel.com \
--to=radu.nicolau@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gakhil@marvell.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
--cc=konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru \
--cc=shaw.leon@gmail.com \
--cc=vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).